User talk:Steel359/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

RfA

I'm curious about your opinion. I'd like maybe to request for adminship now: I have 12 000 edits in hungarian wiki, 4000 here, I think I know the softver, I coordinate here two main projects, I'm active member of Wikipedia Release Version 0.5 review team, Good article project, Stub sorting... I love removing backlogs, now I minimized my activity on my other admin projects, and focus every energy to here. I want to help the community so much. But during the voting, I'd like also to continue admin coaching. What do you think? NCurse _work 15:45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

It'd be very kind of you. :) You find any important fact about me on my user page. Thanks in advance! NCurse _work 15:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I've answered both mails. NCurse _work 17:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Sure. Done. NCurse _work 18:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the corrections. :) I'll give more attention to these. NCurse _work 13:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Protection of Hurricane Katrina

Well, that goes to show how often I look at the main page, I honestly had no idea. Oops. —freak(talk) 06:37, Sep. 30, 2006 (UTC)

Well, Thanks

Well, thanks for the love. I'm not totally certain why you do, but it is appreciated. Giant onehead 20:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, although he basically set him up himself, couldn't resist. Giant onehead 20:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Nice :)

I was just adding him to the CVU blacklist when I was pinged by your edit coming thru IRC (my talk is a watched page), thanks! Glen 02:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Serial spammer still at it after two blocks

Hi. After being blocked by you on 21:24, 17 September 2006 , immediately returning to linkspam advertising of his own blog, and being blocked by User:William M. Connolley on 20:49, 20 September 2006, the anon IP user User:24.60.85.190 (talk), undaunted, came back to serially spam pages on Sept. 23. (See here). Blocking doesn't seem to stop him, and other editors beside myself are spending much time on cleanup after him. Is there anything that can be done with this recidivist? Thanks for any help. -- Tenebrae 15:24, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Righto. I was away for a few days. Thanks again! -- Tenebrae 15:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest

Hi Steel, Thank you for your interest in my voting patterns. I very rarely compromise on my minimum criteria; I try to remain consistent (and, by extension, fair). It looks as though the nominee in question will be confirmed without a single oppose vote, so I'm curious as to why you happen to be so concerned with the neutral votes in this case. Themindset 19:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

We do not seem to be hearing each other. I feel I've answered your question, but you haven't answered mine... Themindset 19:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Principles are a great thing to have. One of my principles is that I will not consider supporting unless my minimum edit count criteria are met. By applying these principles consistently, they are applied fairly. To answer your other questions:

• why do you neutral or oppose candidates based on arbitrary edit counts?
  • The edit counts are very easy to reatch (without AWB), simply 5 or 6 mainspace edits a day for 6 months will get 1000 mainspace edits. A thousand mainspace edits is my rock-hard minimum (and my decision is based on when the RfA is started, not achieving the criteria midway through the RfA), I do not waiver on this point. Like I've stated, it's the principle of the matter. In fact, it would be much easier to support an RfA where there's over 50 supports and no opposes (I wouldn't be required to explain myself, certainly).
• Would you prefer a candidate who has simply inflated their edit count with AWB?
  • No. I wouldn't. (I feel that this question is largely rhetorical.)
• Also, why did you go neutral when NCurse only failed the mainspace requirement by mere 20 edits?
  • This is my absolute, rock-hard minimum. Themindset 19:27, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The edit counts are simply my minimum to consider supporting. Therefore the 3000 AWB edits would not garner my automatic support, indeed I would be quite concerned as to whether the nom had any real article-building experience (this is usually evidenced by article talk-page edits). If the 900 mainspace edits were large and valuable, as you suggested, and the user (as a result) had at least 1FA, and this would certainly make me consider waiving my 1000 minimum. But this would be a rare exception (I've only made such an exception once, that I can remember). I certainly hope this clears up everything. Themindset 19:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Because, in general, that is my criteria. As I said, I make exceptions only in very rare circumstances (ie only once). All this is covered in the initial wikilink to my RFA standards. Themindset 20:17, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes it is. I use the words generally and usually, both terms clearly imply that there is a degree of latitude involved. Themindset 20:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I really do appreciate your interest in my evaluation process, and the fact that you clearly do not agree with it. Please note that my evaluation is done in good faith, and that I try to be respectful and civil. And I especially thank you for being friendly and open-minded. Happy editing. Themindset 20:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Palkia

Could you please have a word with Inforazer (talk · contribs)? He's giving me preverbial pelters. (A regional team, meaning to give a hard time!) Highway ^Daytrippers 20:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

He's reverted 3 or 4 times now, I'm not sure how to proceed, I'd rather hold back on action, instead of bulldozing in and muck of it. Thoughts? Highway ^Daytrippers 16:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Is there anything I can do? Highway ^Daytrippers 16:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks anyway. Highway ^Daytrippers 16:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

a thief of time

i'm curious as to why you deleted the article on the tony hillerman book A Thief Of Time. Gringo300 02:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Rules

That may be, but blanking talk pages because of it is also against the rules, of which you broke as well. Inforazer 13:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

You should know that already, if not you shouldn't be an admin. Blanking something like that especially since it when it was in good faith and wasn't harmful, is bad form. Please understand what Wiki is NOT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_Bureaucracy Inforazer 13:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Also read this, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikilawyering

Even on that very page, where you are supposed to assume good faith it states, "There is reasonable allowance for speculation, suggestion and personal knowledge with a view to prompting further investigation, but it is a serious misuse of a talk page to continue to argue any point that has not met policy requirements." Which was what the discussion was about. Speculating on Palia's type before it became verifiable information. Initially someone said it was a water type when it did not look like a water type, and someone voiced that opinion which was valid since no source was given to indicate that information. Clearly the discussion has no meaning now because the types have been verified, but blanking the discussion because someone wants to save face in an argument isn't acceptable. Inforazer 14:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Amrykid

Hi there! I don't believe we've ever met, so hello! It's good to meet you. :)

To business: Yes and no. I'm concerned that Amrykid and his friend, BrainiacOutcast, have not contributed to our encyclopedia. However, I know that my first 20 edits or so were asking questions and figuring the whole userpage thing out, so I'm hoping that it is the same with these two users. I'm beginning to become quite worried that these users do not realize that we are building an encyclopedia and I plan to contact them about that issue on Friday, October 6. As you may have noticed, I previously warned both BrainiacOutcast and Amrykid that they are not to use their talk pages to make plans. That was fairly effective, and I hope that my reminder that we are here to build an encyclopedia will be even more efficient.

Have a great day! :) Srose (talk) 15:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Inforazer

Behavior as bad as that warrants an indefinite block immediately in the interest of damage control. The only reason to bother the community in these situations is when there is a chance for rehabilitation, and his threats pretty much ruled that out. FeloniousMonk 18:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Geography

The UK can say what it wants, it is 1 country and I will not call England/Scotland/Wales/Northern Ireland seperate countries because they are not. TJ Spyke 20:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Your government can say whatever they want, the United Kingdom is 1 country, not 4 seperate mini countries. They are no different than the 50 states that make up the United States, or the provinces of Canada. This is not the place to debate geographical definitions though. TJ Spyke 20:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Another user...

Re. a discussion on Srose's page, User:Usman Hashmi is another user which could do with pointing :). Thanks. --Alex (Talk) 21:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Admin coaching

Your new trainee: Ginkgo100. Fellow coach: Firsfron. As usual let me know if you have any q's etc. Petros471 20:17, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I see you have been assigned as one of my admin coaches. Thank you! I have created a subpage for discussion at User:Ginkgo100/Admin coaching. Please feel free to comment there. Cheers! --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · e@} 20:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Ohlone

Thanks for fixing my goof. meatclerk 20:31, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Skateboarding: Thanks for the vandalism revert

Thank you for reverting the skateboarding article - much appreciated. You know, I don't think Bam Margera would like it very much if he found out that page was frequently being vandalized. Do you think page protection is possible? --D.F. "Jun Kazama Master" Williams 16:29, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Therman Merman

Hi. I noticed that you blocked user Therman Merman earlier today. I think that you should have a look on his talk page and perhaps take action against his likely IP who has impersonated Jimbo Wales. Best regards.--Húsönd 22:49, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

thanks!

thanks for your addition, I was *JUST* going to add it. -- Drini 23:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Ranting?

My but you do hand out orders. What seemed to be a "rant" was a disguised suggestion/request that you restore the photo of Ugo Fano. An (averred) administrator removed it and said he put it on his home PC. That's kind of lousy when I had permission to put it up. He wanted some kind of Wiki or GNU permission - OK, I gave the name and phone number of the contact. All one of you administrators has to do is to call that guy and get GNU permission and then put it back up. I am not sure how to post GNU or Wiki permission. Seems if folks want to add useful items to Wikipedia the administrators might look into other options than removing what was just put up with permission and the source given. Carrionluggage 04:26, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Need some speedy

Would you please stalk my contribs? I've got a little problem... John Reid 11:53, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I never was a fan of those "This user has been blocked indefinitely" notices. -- Steel 12:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. It's really a huge stinking problem throughout userspace... if you had a few days or AWB you could just wipe out everything with that template on it -- if obvious one-off vandals. There may be some slim merit in retaining template on userpages of once-serious users now indef blocked. John Reid 12:03, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

skateboarding

Thanks for adding the protection to skateboarding, that page is vandalized almost daily. Do you think you could do the same to skateboard? We have the same problem there. Thanks! Steve-g 12:35, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

MGS

Okay; I should be able to copyedit it in about 12 hours or so (work and autumnfest ^_^). — Deckiller 13:58, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Re:Eeep!

Oh crap. I usually look over history, but occasionally here and there I miss it. I guess it was one of those times. Sorry about that, but thanks for catching it, Steel. --Nishkid64 20:53, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah thanks for that. I guess I should be more careful around here :-p. I just restored this after I had initially deleted. It was an accidental deletion, as I had like 5 windows open, but your reminder opened my eyes and I was able to note that mistake. So, thanks again. =) --Nishkid64 21:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Haha, I know what you mean. I was on a mad deleting rampage for the last hour or so. According to my deletion logs, I deleted over 90 articles today, most of which occurred in the last hour. --Nishkid64 21:07, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow. I never knew that. I guess that means some of those deletion summaries are misleading. *whistles* --Nishkid64 22:07, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Username blocks

Hey bud, Pop into irc://freenode.net/vandalism-en-newusers and all shall be revealed :) Glen 14:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, sorry about that! This may be better; irc://chat.freenode.net/vandalism-en-newusers - hopefully this one works Glen 14:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

File:Nuvola apps kfm home.png

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a tally of 91/1/4. I can't express how much it means to me to become an administrator. I'll work even more and harder to become useful for the community. If you need a helping hand, don't hesitate to contact me. You wrote: "For the record, NCurse, I didn't do anything anyone else couldn't have done had you asked them. " Don't say that, I'll never forget your help! I still owe you one. :) NCurse work 15:38, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Re:Jimbo Wails

Okay, I created that to prevent impersonation of Jimbo Wales. Thanks for quickly responding to inappropriate account names, but I think you need not block doppelgangers. --Gray Porpoise^{Phocoenidae, not Delphinidae} 21:16, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I see. I'll have to be faster next time. :) I also created a doppelganger for Seadog.M.S. You can ignore that. --Gray Porpoise^{Phocoenidae, not Delphinidae} 21:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Why did you delete the page? --Gray Porpoise^{Phocoenidae, not Delphinidae} 20:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Asterix299

Was wondering if you had any input or comments on this user's unblock request. Luna Santin 03:51, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

The Focus Group

Why did you delete this article? You had no just cause to do so. They are an internationally acclaimed act. Forgive me if im wrong, but an article needs to be suggested for deletion, and an opportunity to object has to be given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr zoidberg590 (talk • contribs)

Even if the article didnt 'assert notability' you cannot just delete it on a whim. You know wikipedia's procedure, please follow it. It is still required that you see if there are objections, which there are. you are in the wrong here. To quote Wikipedia:Speedy keep you have used the 'wrong method of deletion'. even if you use speedy delete it is necessary that you give people the option to object.

Ok notability is that they are pioneers of Hauntology, and major labels like Warp Records are carrying their records because they have realised how important they are. Googling ""The Focus Group" "Ghost Box"" provides 200 pages directly about the band by notable journalists (in some cases.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr zoidberg590 (talk • contribs)

why would you put it up for deletion now you know why it is notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr zoidberg590 (talk • contribs)

There's no need to war over this is there. I'm resisting (plus another user by the looks of it) because I know how much research went into the articles (mainly the ghostbox one) would it perhaps be possible to keep the Ghostbox and hauntology articles, and delete (if you believe it will guenuinly enhance wikipedia) the others? please get back to me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr zoidberg590 (talk • contribs)

ok, i will edit/change these remarks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr zoidberg590 (talk • contribs)

hi, have we come to some agreement then? I've listed some key reasons to keep Hauntology and I've tried to improve Ghost Box as per your instructions, you must realise my only interest is improving wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr zoidberg590 (talk • contribs)

but you know people will just lump them all in together without taking the time to look at them as if they were seperatly up for deletion. Let's keep Hauntology and Ghost Box if possible. who is it that decides based on the Afd? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr zoidberg590 (talk • contribs)

Thanks

I'd just like to say thank you for welcoming me, I'll be looking forward to contributing to this site Metal gear ninty 20:49, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

WikiThanks

Thank you for your cleanup of vandalism to my userpage and Muslim. And thank you for taking appropriate actions. I hope you continue to improve the wiki, as you have today to my *very* small corner of it. :D Logical2u 22:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Concerning Dokdo

Can you edit it to my last version (date: 12:07, 10 October 2006) before closing it again? A unlogged guy added a Japanese POV right before you protected it. Write in my talk page when you do so. Thanks.

-- General Tiger 13:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Pardon? Didn't get what you mean. Just compare my version and the current version. -- General Tiger 13:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Not to complain, but my version was the version that was protected before this protection. All I was doing was returning it to its original version. Also, please read the differences between the current one and my (rather, original) version. Do you think that the article as it is isn't biased? -- General Tiger 13:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

MGS

What a crazy weekend, lol; I'm finally free to copyedit that article with you ^_^ — Deckiller 18:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

thanks!

thanks for semi-protecting my page =] Bloodpack 06:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Asking for your help again

Hi. Thanks for helping with that spammer before. I'm asking now for help with some recalcitrant reverter who, despite at least two editors posting to him, cannot seem to udnerstand that he can't put his personal evaluation of something for which he can't find a citation.

At Daredevil (Marvel Comics), the Anon IP 82.108.12.52 at [1] continues to add a claim (the content doesn't matter, just the fact that it's uncited and unverifiable) that User:Charlesknight and I have repeatedly asked him to cite and verify.

He refuses to provide citation (frankly, since it doesn't exist; his claim is just his analysis/opinion), he doesn't respond, and he simply keeps reverting to this edit here.

He has been blocked in the past (by Admin Mgm, who reverted him here) and as you can see by his list of edits at "[1]" above that his "contributions" to Wikipedia have been primarily this single pet opinion of his, over and over.

I'm asking that he please be block for a sufficient length of time for the Wiki citation requirement to sink in. I'm placing this request now on his Talk page, for full disclosure. Thank you for any help. With respect, -- Tenebrae 15:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Solomon-like wisdom in your action. I disagree about "good faith" when he's done nothing but revert over and over, never discussing or citing, but I appreciate and respect the care and precise you put into it, and the help you gave. Thank you a lot! -- Tenebrae 14:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Illegal immigration

As per policy, when locking down an article as a result of edit warring, the article is reverted to the last version before the edit war started. The edit war starts with the first reversion. The first reversion was Jossi's. You locked the article at the wrong location. -Psychohistorian 17:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

That's funny :)

Its also irrelevant. What is relevant is that sysops abide by policy. -Psychohistorian 18:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

This isn't worth the time for either one of us. Please accept my apologies for snapping at you. I hope we can get this article worked out as expeditiosuly as possible. -Psychohistorian 18:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Annan Plan for Cyprus

Thanks for protection. But something is wrong.I required protection, but page protected at last vandalised version.
My version, as a difference, include some tags about; "verification/sources needed", "neutrality is disputable" and "vikify needed".
protected in this position means no need vikify, all info is correct and approved/sourced and neutral.
Please a second look to article. Regards. Mustafa Akalp 18:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

You have to explain on the talkpage why you want the tag and what you are disputing. You can't just slap a tag on on a whim... You have never edited the talkpage.--Tekleni 18:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Instruction creep

Regarding this revert at WP:CSD, I am worried that there is a creeping tendency for people to label things as intruction creep which are not instruction creep (anti-instruction creep creep?). Good instructions are clear and unambiguous. They can get out of control if people add new instructions and long, rambling explanations. Equally, instructions can be nearly useless if they do not have explanations, or link to explanations. The text you reverted to says:

"Note that administrators should always verify the legitimacy of a speedy deletion candidate before taking action. It is the administrator's responsibility to make sure that speedy deletion tags are accurate."

This begs the question - how does an administrator verify the legitimacy of a speedy deletion? Remember that there will be new admins coming to this page, some of whom may, despite not being very familiar with some of the processes, dive straight in. As an example, take Wikipedia:Deletion_process where all the processes except speedy deletion, say "determine whether consensus is to keep or delete". The corresponding statement for speedy deletion should be "use judgement to determine whether the page is a suitable candidate for speedy deletion". This is so obviously missing, that I am just going to add it now. This is not instruction creep, but is merely making clear what before was not clear. Carcharoth 11:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Friday the 13th

Thanks for the speedy protection! ---J.S (t|c) 22:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

For a few hours it didn't even occur to me why the page was so bloody active... then I heard a local talk show host actualy quote something almost exactly from the article then it all clicked. lol wow I'm smart. ---J.S (t|c) 22:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

You saved me the trouble of going to WP:AIV. :-) -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 17:02, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

User:84.254.189.90

I've got my eye on this clown too. Cnwb 11:41, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Also keep an eye on User:Rex steele, who I suspect is the same user. Cnwb 12:14, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Hospital in Indonesia

Why do you delete this translation? http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daftar_rumah_sakit_di_Indonesia— Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.210.145.6 (talk • contribs)

(Possible dynamic IP so leaving a reply here as well) I didn't think we really needed a list of every non-notable hospital in Indonesia. -- Steel 12:47, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

did not need the list. Why the following page still exist?

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

Why all the following pages still exist?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hospitals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hospitals_in_Asia

Did not need information about Indonesian Hospital. Why this page still exist?

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

Thanks

For reverting vandalism to my user page. I don't know how that one slipped through. MER-C 13:35, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Same here. :) --Andeh 15:48, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Request

Hey, would you be able to move Samandağ to Seleucia Pieria? (I'm pretty sure this would be non-controversial) Once you've done that, I'll create a new article from the redirect of Samandağ. Thanks. —Khoikhoi 20:09, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again! —Khoikhoi 20:13, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Question on deletions

I just wondered why you saw fit to remove the External links I'd edited in, for example on James MacPherson, where the linked article was arguably more in depth than the Wikipedia entry itself? I gather you are a "deletionist". But there is such a thing as being too zealous in one's task... ;)

Alexander G. Rubio alexander.rubio@gmail.com

Thanks!

Thanks! Now I understand this whole autoblock thing. Nishkid64 20:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

MGS3

I noticed it had been promoted, so I didn't bother going through it. I forgot to ask: would you like me to go through it anyway? ^_^ — Deckiller 22:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

User:203.217.83.1

Hi Steel, I think its very obvious that IP was indeed User:Tequendamia. Thanks for blocking this IP. Best, Gwernol 14:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Hospital rubbish

Just dropping you a quick note to say that I've prodded List of hospitals in Egypt and merged the List of hospitals in Liechtenstein in with Liechtenstein. Moreschi 16:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Hospital in Egypt - rubbish. Why this page still exist?

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

Indian Caste System

Considering the users who edit warred were blocked, is it necessary to have the article protected? BhaiSaab ^talk 16:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I haven't got a response from the other person you referred me to. Can the article please be unlocked? I wish to contribute. Thanks. BhaiSaab ^talk 11:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. BhaiSaab ^talk 12:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

OK...Hkelkar has done four seperate reverts on the article after you've unlocked it unfortunately. 3 reverts([2], [3], [4]) are identical partial reverts, and the other earliest revert [5] undid Tequendamia's edit. All this despite him being held to 1RR on the article [6]. BhaiSaab ^talk 16:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Halloween

Could you please delete the 'blah blah blah' vandalism above the first picture in the halloween article. im having trouble doing so. thanks.

Edits

im so sorry for the lack of edits.im searching for edits.but i created a article I am Amrykid ,Elite wikistudent and I approve this message.

Lost further reading

You seem to have protected the page at the point where User:MatthewFenton started the bad faith edits. Could you put the page back to the point where it was first up for afd please? [7] --217.65.158.91 12:33, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale

Regarding your sprotecting it, I'm not sure if it stuck as new users seem to be vandalizing it. Could you please take a look?

This diff by a new user: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jarnail_Singh_Bhindranwale&diff=82205095&oldid=81520584

The user is new:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Gstar4

Thanks.Hkelkar 20:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

So he's been waiting a week I see.Hkelkar 20:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Doogle

Well done! How on earth did you manage to assess Doogle for notability in two minutes flat? Here's a friendly suggestion - don't just immediately delete things - have a quick word with the author first, especially if he's an established editor. I'm going to re-instate the article. Thanks. Arcturus 23:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Reply

I tried that 2 days ago, but he doesn't want to let it go of the issue. I've tried darn near every technique to avoid him, but his revert warring with me and constant messaging on my talk page keeps me from letting it go. — Moe 20:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I tried that, but I keep getting the new messages template every 5 minutes. It's either I don't respond and he continues on or I respond. — Moe 21:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Gladly, I would have days ago, and I tried to ask him to stop, but ask you can see he continued. Happily, I won't respond to him at all, like I intended to. (Note: I might find a typo in my editing some times, and I go back to correct this, please don't mistake this as responding to him :p). — Moe 21:08, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Of course he wants it gone. Would you want to continue to participate in a discussion of how you spread false information about someone? In fact, Moe took a quote of mine and altered it to make it seem like I am biased.

Congratulations, you've figured out my plan. I didn't think anyone would realize that because I don't think Danny Phantom characters deserve an article, I want to delete every television show character article. A Link to the Past (talk) 04:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Making it seem like that is all I have said.

Congratulations, you've figured out my plan. I didn't think anyone would realize that because I don't think Danny Phantom characters deserve an article, I want to delete every television show character article. Despite it making no sense, being completely illogical and it being completely stupid to think that way, you somehow interpret it that way. Sarcasm aside,

When in fact, I made it blatantly obvious that what he quoted was sarcasm - going as far as saying "sarcasm aside". Another show of how Moe is a liar. The day I let someone get away with spreading false information about me is the day I'm blocked from editing Wikipedia forever and ever. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:21, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Userpage

hi steel,i just wanted to know why you deleted my userpage? if you want me off wikipedia then just tell me then block me. I am Amrykid ,Elite wikistudent and I approve this message.

Unprotect List of Arab scientists and scholars

Hi steel,

You protected the page 10 days ago and forgot to unprotect it. Thank you Jidan 22:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! :-) Jidan 01:24, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

On the subject of page un-protection, I'm not sure if I'm supposed to bring it up here or just wait until List of characters in Golden Sun gets unprotected, but I think people are ready to fix up the page that had that edit warring going on with the Japanese names. You can see the discussion on its talk page. You can unprotect it anytime, I think. Thanks. Erik Jensen ^{(I appreciate talk!)} 21:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Template:Test

The "it" is wholly unnecessary. It basically reminds people that we're referring to the subject of the sentence (the test), which was already established three words earlier. We can lose that comma as well. -- Steel 20:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

With the comma in place, the sentence is grammatically incorrect without the "it." At least, this is true in American English. It's been suggested that such sentence structure is considered correct in British English (which I assume you speak), but I've encountered mixed opinions among people from the UK. (Some believed that this was acceptable, but others disagreed.) I haven't seen anyone claim that the sentence is grammatically incorrect with the "it."

If the comma were to be removed, the "it" would be rendered extraneous, but this would harm the sentence's flow. The comma breaks it up and aids in comprehension. —David Levy 23:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

411mania

I would like to request either an unprotection or semiprotection as per Talk:411mania#"Notability" and "Importance" claims in which I entered into a dialogue with JB196, although I did not wish to validate him, and after refuting his claims he has left us with:

Glazed is my favorite type of donut.64.12.117.6 04:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Thus we are left with nothing to discuss. I also feel that the full protection was unwarranted considering that JB196 is a banned user thus making all of his arguments null and void. –– Lid^(Talk) 05:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

AfD

Replied on mytalk.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 13:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

MGS3

Why can we avoid details like "this"? All i am doing is expanding the article with useful and notable info. maybe you can explain what you mean by the 'Old Article'? DARReN^TALK 17:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

sorry i only just got your message. but surely the fact tht Sokolov gets killed is mentionable DARReN^TALK 18:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: 142.32.208.234

Works for me. I appreciate the note, thank you. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 18:23, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

A very Californian RfA thanks from Luna Santin

Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which succeeded with a final tally of (97/4/4)! I've never been able to accept compliments gracefully, and the heavy support from this outstanding community left me at a complete loss for words -- so, a very belated thank you for all of your kind words. I have done and will continue to do the utmost to serve the community in this new capacity, wherever it may take me, and to set an example others might wish to follow in. With a little luck and a lot of advice, this may be enough. Maybe someday the enwiki admins of the future will look back and say, "Yeah, that guy was an admin." Hopefully then they don't start talking about the explosive ArbComm case I got tied into and oh what a drama that was, but we'll see, won't we? Surely some of you have seen me in action by now; with that in mind, I openly invite and welcome any feedback here or here -- help me become the best editor and sysop I can be. Again, thank you. –Luna Santin

Thanks for your trust. I'll look forward to seeing you on the patrol. :) Luna Santin 19:13, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

RE:Userpage

ok ill contribute the wikipedia but why is my page protected.And i need help on the article i created.Most of the time when i do contribute to that article it gets deleted.i even had to upload the casino image to wikipedia.but it got delete from the article.who knows if it got deleted from wikipedia.so anyway i need help on that article.I am Amrykid ,Elite wikistudent and I approve this message.

Wikiprojects

im thinking joining this wikiproject.I am Amrykid ,Elite wikistudent and I approve this message.

Capped edit summaries

Sorry, in a bit of a panic here. I'm freaking out; I've left the image on 30+ user talk pages, and each one of them was an unintended copywrite violation. I'll fix my edit summary from here on out. - Kribbeh 22:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Bachmann Thomas and Friends - RFPP Declined on 3rd request.

Dear Steel359, I recently placed this page up for RFPP due to persistent IP vandalism and problems we were experiencing with continual reverts by myself and Discospinster. At the time, I had not noticed that the IP editor concerned was in breach of WP:3RR and therefore I referred it when I realised over to the 3RR noticeboard. The article has now been Sprotected because of the 3RR violations. I thought I should notify you just so that you know that I haven't been sneaky or anything, it was a genuine mistake which I re-referred when I discovered the problem. At the time I sent it to WP:RFPP I had no idea this was the case. Thank you for your attention to this issue. Thor Malmjursson 11:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC) Thor's pet yack

Unprotect

well then i won't add stuff to my userpage that are not wikipedia related,but can you please unprotect my userpage.ill add my userboxes to my userbox page.I am Amrykid ,Elite wikistudent and I approve this message.

Thanks!

WikiThanks

Thanks for blocking AlphabetSoup! Addhoc 12:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Redirects

Your redirect didn't work because wikipedia is case sensitive. The redirect code needs to be all capitals. There also has to be a space between the redirect code and the target. You had written #Redirect[[link]], while it should have been #REDIRECT [[link]]. Aecis ^{Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984.} 15:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Your sandbox redirects to Wikipedia, but your edit to Dave Bulldog showed up as "1. redirectThe Big Issue", which is why I edited it. Aecis ^{Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984.} 15:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Heh.

This amused me. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 15:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Elephant Larry

I'd like to make a case for the undeletion of the Elephant Larry entry, which was deleted on the grounds that it did not meet notability requirements.

Elephant Larry is currently part of "The Great Sketch Experiment" run by jibjab.com and directed by John Landis. Landis as well as Gregg and Evan Spiridellis of jibjab.com were on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno to promote this contest on 10/20/06.

Elephant Larry has had a review published in the New York Times as well as Time Out New York, The Onion, the Charleston City Paper, and was one of Backstage's Top 10 Comedy Best Bets of 2004.

These, I believe, are the main facts that evidence notabiliy. I hope this is sufficient.

Edited five minutes later: Thank you!

Signed, callyook

Please Reconsider My Links

I do not understand why my links were deleted. I understand your policy of swift removal of spam. However, I feel this is a case where swift removal led to an unnecessary deletion. Please reconsider my links, especially the Katrina image. I do not see how you could consider it "inappropriate." It characterizes damage inflicted upon New Orleans on a very grand scale. Seotommy 20:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I need your help

There is a spammer on the 83.26.xx.xx netblock hitting articles related to peer-to-peer protocols and software. Example here. He completely ignores warnings and reverts, dozens of which I've issued or performed in the past two days. I hereby request a range block of the 83.26.xx.xx subnet for however long you see fit. This vandal is highly unrepentant, incorrigible, and deliberately and willfully ignores all warnings and reverts, even ones by Admins. I have been forced to contravene 3RR on several articles, and on more than one occasion severely, in order to handle this threat and defend the integrity of the articles. I need help. I can't deal with this spammer alone. Thank you. E. Sn0 =31337= 21:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For fighting alongside me and delivering a stunning Coup de Grace to the Enemy in my battle against spammers hitting Peer-to-Peer related articles! Bravo! E. Sn0 =31337= 23:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Bitcomet is now under attack. Leuk He has started fighting on the article emule, and the spammer has now taken to simply registering a throwaway account {User:Rozpusta, which apparently means 'debauchery' or 'immorality', lending credence to the theory he knows he's wrong) for the singular purpose of continuing his spam attack. E. Sn0 =31337= 16:40, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Famous Paintings

"Famous Paintings" was one of my favourite wiki pages that provided an almost exhaustive list of the most popular paintings through the ages under good categories. But ZAP!! All of a sudden on Oct 21, I find the page deleted. That page was surely an interseting read and was a springboard from which one could jump to the various other painting topics. I really found the page very useful. Could I have the page back please?

Tamizhmarai R (User:203.129.195.149)

That page was deleted because it was a redirect to List of artworks which was deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of artworks. -- Steel 11:21, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Favor

Hey, sorry to bother you, but Empires is now in an FAC, and AnonEMouse wanted me to add the number of units sold. I looked through every featured article for where they found there unit numbers, and I still couldn't find empires on the website that had the information. Do you have any ideas? You've done two FAs, so I thought you might know some websites I haven't looked yet. Thanks. Any help would be appreciated.--Clyde Miller 03:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I just realized that that might have come off like I want you to look up the stuff for me. There really isn't a way to say this without sounding awkward, but I just wanted to know if you could tell me about some websites the average video game editor wouldn't have known about. --Clyde Miller 03:47, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I looked around and, just as you and I both expected, there was nothing. Oh well, I'll tell mouse about it (it would really help if SSSI's website was still operating). On the same token, he thinks there is an article out there that compares AoE with Empires. I kinda laugh thinking about it. If this game sold so few units that it didn't even make the charts, who is going to do a comparison article on it?--Clyde Miller 13:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Amkid

I figured it must be something close to that, just from his manner of writing.

There seem to be a lot of kids aged 11-13 registering lately. I wonder why it is...

Anyway, thanks for the extra info. :) Have a good day! Srose (talk) 13:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Burgmann College

I don't get it. You protected the Burgmann College article from vandalism, but you protected the version that contains the uncited, unfounded, non-NPOV text. The other complainant says that I should enter a process of editing each line instead of just deleting the whole thing. Why would I bother? Why must I be the one to clean up this rubbish when the original author cannot be bothered to follow even the most basic Wikipedia polices of attribution and NPOV authorship? There is nothing in this body of text that suggests that it is in any way notable, nor suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia - if you view any of the other ANU college pages, you'll see none of them have this kind of speculative hearsay. It speculates on what people may or may not have been doing and even *thinking*, it makes wild assertions with no backup at all. It even uses weasel words! Finally, if you read the contribution history of the authors, you'll note that *this is the only contribution they've made to Wikipedia*. Why would they, in any way, be interested in carefully going through the text to make sure it subscribes to Wikipedia standards? They are clearly only interested in this single incident, and are not interested in spreading knowledge. And after all this, you say you favour a policy of 'deletion' when 'every man and his dog can see it will be deleted anyway'. I just don't get it. -TarenCapel 00:03, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Can I suggest that you delete the sections from the "Leadership Struggle 2005" to the 2007 tutor "controversy", and then return to protecting the page? These sections offer nothing to the relevant historical information about Burgmann College, and do nothing but discredit it as an academic residence. However, as TarenCapel rightly states, most of the authors for the Burgmann College page have no desire to obey by Wikipedia rules or conventions, and upon removal the sections will most likely be reinserted by another disgruntled resident (for after all, they are the only people who view the page in the first place). The page must be placed under protection to avoid this kind of childish behaviour, but it would be good if the offending areas could be removed completely from the page. - User:LordVader06 15:22, 28 October 2006

I doubt we will see any movement on this issue from this admin. Viewing some of the other entries on this page, it seems as though this admin frequently protects pages with the contested text in place. -TarenCapel 06:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

FFS...

So because I decided that bad information is bad for Wikipedia, the article gets protected?

Winning logic! I guess I should go edit Bomberman Quest to say that it sold a billion copies; and since you prefer false information, you'd surely support it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:42, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Protection policy particularly the line "Admins must not protect pages they are actively engaged in editing".Geni 22:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Protecting pages you are involved in

Please review Wikipedia:Protection policy. Under no circumstances should administrators protect pages they are actively involved in a dispute in, except in the case of simple vandalism. I have unprotected Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater for this reason. Cowman109^Talk 22:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

I have blocked you for three hours for edit warring in Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater. The issues of the links and the style of spellings on the article should be discussed on the talk page of the article and not sorted out through edit warring. It would still be helpful for you to explain your protection of the article as well, as that is a very serious matter. Thank you. Cowman109^Talk 00:52, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Smile

Ginkgo100 ^{talk · e@} 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! 03:07, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

How do I get a response from you?

You removed my link showing Katrina damage from the Katrina image section and placed a templated comment on my user talk page, all within 3 minutes of the time I originally placed the link. I asked for some sort of explanation almost a week ago now, and have heard nothing. This does not seem fair. Seotommy 15:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Steel is on a wikibreak at the moment, but at this time I would say that you should go to the talk page of the article in question and propose adding the picture - if there are no objections after a few days it could be added. Cowman109^Talk 20:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Imposter

Have you seen Steelers132 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? Addhoc 15:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to have bothered you, Alphachimp has indefinitely blocked the vandal only account. Addhoc 16:06, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

A Descriptive Header

Category:Broken redirects for speedy deletion is OK if you think that is a better name. I just wanted to pull those out since they are quicker to process. Vegaswikian 01:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

November Esperanza Newsletter

For your reading pleasure, the newest Esperanza newsletter (November '06 edition) can be found at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter. —Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, The Halo, Shreshth91 and HighwayCello, 20:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Admin coaching - October 29

As far as I can see you are not currently assigned as a coach to anyone at Admin coaching. Are OK to receive a new trainee? Thank you for helping with admin coaching! Highway ^{Grammar Enforcer!} 22:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Custom warnings

I dont use any of the wiki jail ones. I only use my custom warning 4. And ONLY as a last resort for serious blatant vandals who repeat. If you still do not reccomend this, or have a reccomended rewording then i am open to it. Chris Kreider 17:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback on that. I will limit the number of warnings i give after the test 4 warning. However, the only reason i warn after test 4 is for the blocking admin to see that the user did not heed any of the warnings. When I warn, I always give the full range of warnings, no matter how blatant. I have been frustrated before by vandals whom i warn to test 4, continue to revert there vandalism but do not warn them anymore and they do not get blocked because they say that they stopped. I do understand what you are saying, and none of this is meant personally for you, just explaining why i was using those warnings. Thanks again for the feedback! Chris Kreider 18:03, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you again for bringing it to my attention. I will cut back on my warnings after test 4. Thanks again. Chris Kreider 18:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Medical Assistant (MA)

Thanks Steel359! There has been quite a debate around the Medical Assistant article, spurred by the removal of external links, some placed by myself, some placed by others. I noticed you have stepped in and cleaned up the article, and I must say, I am impressed and like it; especially with the removal of the external hyperlink reference to the AAMA web site (role delineation chart) as this was a commercial site.

Needless to say, I believe people will benefit from good external links, but not everybody here seems to see eye to eye on what is and what isn't. I can live with that, as long as it is fair.

User:Danni R. 18:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC) (Arbitrary date added to ensure archival -- Steel)

FUC and templates

Pardon my ignorance, but the Baltimore Poly logo that I used in my template, was that not appropriate? Wildthing61476 23:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

MGS3 Soundtrack

I would approve of a merge only if the article's soundtrack information as well as its complete track list are included on the Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater article under Audio. But when one thinks about it, the Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater Original Soundtrack has recently been created and is still a stub so it has potential to grow. In addition, it is under the category Category:Computer and video game soundtracks, specifically based on Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eaters original video game soundtrack, not the video game itself.

For examples of articles dedicated solely to a video game's soundtrack album, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Computer_and_video_game_soundtracks. Also, in the case of the Metal Gear Solid series' soundtrack albums, you'll notice the page, Metal Gear Solid follows the same format as Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater under the Audio section of the article, with a link to the OST article including complete track list.

(FF7SquallStrife7 01:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC))

I object to merging Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater with its own seperate album. As I've stated before, the soundtrack is in the category of Computer and Video Game Soundtracks and is under a completely different project, Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums, as opposed to being just the Audio in a video game; it's an album. If people just decided on their own to merge Movies with their respective albums, there would be no Wikiproject for Albums at all. (FF7SquallStrife7 01:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC))

Hey

Talk to you later, Highway ^{Ringo Starr!} 08:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Aiden's mum

Thanks for blocking this user. It was apparant that his account was used only for vandalism of pages(including mine). Once again thank you. DJJJ 13:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Response

Harassment? The user is making it difficult for me to edit Wikipedia by reverting edits I make, assuming bad faith in what I am saying, and refusing to respond to anything I say. He is being a complete hypocrite, and ignoring other users for such a poor reason is not going to help on an RfAr. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, this is more or less a personal attack. The user has made accusations that I have somehow disrupted Wikipedia by c/ping an article onto my user page, and that I am baiting him (an accusation of trolling). Whenever I ask him to back up these attacks on me, he ignores me. The user has shown to me that he does not care to work with particular users, which is basically going against everything Wikipedia is about - a community that works together. Hell, he told another user that you should focus on the content, not the user, and yet he's doing the exact opposite. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

So you're saying that InShaneee has never accused me of trolling, reverted me constantly? I must have been confused when I saw dozens of reversions with literally no reasoning behind them and him absolutely refusing to explain his edits. And I never claimed he was acting in bad faith (not intentionally, anyway). I accused him of assuming bad faith. He did, in fact, say that I was baiting him (ie trolling), and that I was not actually doing what I claimed to be doing. The number of disputes I was involved in is completely irrelevant. I did not force him to make these edits, assume bad faith, and accuse users of trolling and vandalism. And if I did, then he is far too unstable to have the amount of power that he has. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you a bureaucrat?

Just wondering since you closed Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Leotolstoy early despite the nominees repeated request to leave the failing nomination open. My understanding is that we've elected a few chosen individuals to perform that task, and I don't see your name on the list. —Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 00:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philosophy of probability

Just wanted to let you know I appreciated the way you handled the closing of this AfD. A lot of admins would have simply looked at the overwhelming number of deletes, but you took the time to understand the actual consensus. (And if you want to reply, you can do it here.) —Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 01:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

That was a brave/surprising close, but it is one I can endorse on DRV, should it head that way. Kudos for measuring consensus instead of counting votes. GRBerry 02:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais

Hi, I see that you have unprotected Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais because the level of vandalism seems low to you. I do not object, but PLEASE also bookmark the page and revert the rare vandalisms occuring there almost every day. I have no time to do so. Good luck. --Ioannes Pragensis 20:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Steel359, thank you for the positive response. Regarding your sentence "Though if I'm not sure whether something's vandalism (like today's anon edit)": thats just the problem with many vandals like this: you must read the original source, the BBC interview, find the correct citation and compare it with the article. Only then you see that the anonymous editor dropped an important and sourced word, which proves that Sudais is an antisemite. And that is exactly the work I am already tired to do. The vandals on this page mostly are not usual random vandals, but people who deliberately wish to make Sudais look better than he really is. Greetings, --Ioannes Pragensis 09:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The Wedge (TV show)

Thank you for doing that, Gnangarra 11:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Why did you close my Rfa?

Reply here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Leotolstoy Leotolstoy 14:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Carnegie Council

You've deleted this site 3 times. The first time was because it seemed like advertising. I'm just trying to tell the world about a really cool place I learned about. I recreated the article last week without any violation of ANY wikipedia policy. Did you even read it before you deleted it? Thanks! Shmifi 18:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC) (Arbitrary date added to ensure archival -- Steel)

Admin Coaching

Heya Steel!

Something strange is going on over at the Admin coaching page. User:The Transhumanist recently created an "Admin School" which was supposed to do...well, basically the same thing as Admin Coaching: prep editors for Adminship, though it was run by non-Admins. It appears this was quickly rejected by the community. Now, a few users, including Transhumanist, have posted to the Admin Coaching talk page. They want to change the name of the program. They also want to change how the program is run, with proposals for multiple levels of "trust", etc. Since these folks aren't admins, and since The Transhumanist has only been with us for a few months, these proposals are a little strange: their new "Virtual classroom" talks about what browser to use, but doesn't address anything that an Admin trainee would need to become an admin. It's alarming, because these nice folks have had no experience being admins, and in Carcharoth's latest post he proposes revamping the entire program, with a system of levels through which users would have to "graduate" (which is, I assume, where the Virtual School comes in). Since you are an admin coach, and these many proposed changes will affect you, please weigh in on the discussion here. Thanks, Firsfron of Ronchester 19:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Good question! Both of the pages were started by The Transhumanist. While there are certainly some good ideas in there, he's only been editing for a few months... I just don't think that's long enough to even be coaching people for adminship, let alone revamping the entire Coaching process. Again, though, that's just my opinion. I'm only one voice. Firsfron of Ronchester 20:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Block of User:71.111.148.121

Thanks, much appreciated. I didn't want to impose a block myself as I don't want to give even the appearance of a conflict of interest. This user has been around before on different IPs, I believe, and is a long-term menace to the Jodi Foster article. Good work on the swift action. Best, as always, Gwernol 23:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Heads up that the user has now written this up on the requests for arbitration page. I don't think you have much to worry about, though. Newyorkbrad 16:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Molag Bal

Right before I was about to block Molag Bal indefinitely as a VoA, I saw that you already had blocked him for a day. After reviewing his edits and personal attacks on my page and other user's pages, I don't think a 24-hr block is appropriate here. The user has a history of vandalism, and I just recently deleted two articles the user made on a non-notable fictional character. I would like your opinion on this matter, which is why I came to ask you, since you were the blocking admin. Nishkid64 16:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

just saying hi

Ah, I just noticed you are back from Wikibreak, dear admin coach! Hope things are okay. Cheers! --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · e@} 23:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Katana protection

I saw that this request has been declined. There has been ongoing discussion about anonymous and unjustified readditions to this article for some time now on the talk page; this is the second such incident in the last few months. It's difficult to work constructively on an article where every second edit is a rvv; there have been over 25 such reverts over the last week. This is on the talk page:

I will continue to Revert your deletions166.102.231.101 17:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Any chance of reconsidering? I held off requesting this because of the positive anon edits, but of late these are a small minority. Chris Cunningham 17:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

For stopping the vandalism flood on Sony Computer Entertainment. I was getting tired of sticking my finger in the hole!  ;) Russ (talk) 18:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protection

I noticed that you recently semi-protected DePauw University, but it looks like the recent vandalism has been by only two non-rotating IP addresses, so my suggestion would be to simply block the IPs for a week instead of semi-protecting the page. Generally semi-protection is best used sparely and only if there are multiple IPs that rotate or that cannot be singled out in order to keep a page consistently vandalism-free, if my interpretation makes any sense. :D Cowman109^Talk 20:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the vandalism

Thanks again for reverting the recent vandalism to my talk page. As always, much appreciated. Gwernol 20:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I'm hoping that we get a speedy resolution from ArbCom otherwise its going to get very complex to follow... Gwernol 21:21, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Blockedtext

Yeah, sorry about that. I tried to convince him putting it above was a bad idea, but there we go. It was only intended as a test, anyway – Gurch 21:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

www.stateuniversity.com

I don't know how to do this, but I thought you might: This site posted links in wikipedia for many of the pages listed on their site. Over 100 schools on their site and they are continuing to add more. 59.145.233.130, 59.95.66.173, 59.95.70.60, 74.134.246.13, 59.95.70.84, 59.145.233.130, 58.68.79.5 These are just a few of the IP's involved. It currently has 68 insertions in Wikipedia.

Also, this site is also connected with these others, many of which were added along with stateuniversity.com: www.encyclopedia.jrank.org www.madehow.com www.referenceforbusiness.com www.nationsencyclopedia.com www.everyculture.com

They keep switching ip's to break the pattern. Any help/advice would definitely be appreciated.

Stealthound 21:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Serebii.net Removal

Celebi had a small section about the webpage Serebii.net, which you deleted. However, Koffing has a section about Smogon.com. I'd already asked on the Celebi talk page -- what do you think we should do, delete Smogon's section from Koffing or revert Serebii's section in Celebi? Consistency's the word. EllipsesBent 01:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Kofun Period

Please release the version of the Room218 whom you are protecting. It cannot correctly introduce information on Japan by Room218 continuous edit.