User talk:Tawker/Oct06

Xyrael

I've responded to your concerns of Xyrael reverting Werdnabot. This was in good faith — I've had to suspend Werdnabot for the time being to limit damage from a script bug, affecting 93 edits. I can carry on using another version that's worked successfully for six months — however this will compound issues associated with Werdnabot mixing up where it's supposed to archive to. Cheers — Werdna talk criticism 05:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heya Tawker, I can confirm this. Sorry for the confusion. I noted that it may have been better to use a manual revert for a better edit summary, but the sheer volume of rollbacks to be made made this a totally inefficient option. Hope this explains it; thanks for your understanding. —Xyrael / 09:04, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your understanding :) —Xyrael / 20:25, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking

Thanks for the tip - I'm usually much more of a WikiGnome than a vandal fighter; I think this was actually my first block! But he was blatant and he hit one of the pages I was working on, so what the heck. I didn't have the time or the patience to go look up all the rules but I figured 24 hours was long enough to discourage him and short enough not to get me in trouble if I missed a step in the Almighty Process -- but hey, I guessed right on {{blocked}} being the right template, right? :) Again, thanks for the kind word; next time I'll know. — Catherine\^talk 15:49, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tawkerbot

hello!

could you please give me a list of all python/php/perl/whatever modules i have to install that tawkerbot gets running?

thanks in advance, --HardDisk 16:27, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mongooses?

This user [1] is asking you to unblock him, but he's not blocked, or at least not by username. Is it possible you just blocked an IP that was posting nonsense about mongooses? Fan-1967 18:43, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tawkerbot2 clone?

I always wanted to run my own clone of TB2. Can I please do so if it's possible? Thanks. -- Selmo ^(talk) 19:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nishkid64's RfA thanks

Thank you very much for participating in my RfA, which closed successfully earlier today with a result of (60/9/4). Although, I encountered a few problems in my RfA, I have peacefully resolved my conflicts and made amends with the people involved. If you have any further questions or suggestions, feel free talk to me. I hope I will live up to your expectations. --Nishkid64 22:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous servers

Thank you for lifting the ban on this IP address. As I mentioned, this is part of an academic project to help overcome political censorship. How would you recommend these anonymous systems peacefully co-exist with systems like wikipedia?

I posted a response to you on my talk page. 80.237.206.62 03:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Newman article

Thanks for your guidance regarding moving of an article. I appreciate the information. Dbart 17:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

You're a brave man... [2] --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 22:03, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To make it even more beleivable you should add this to mediawiki:monobook.js, which makes the edit tab say 'view source' if user is anon, but they can still edit if they are smart enough to click it (if the page is elephant):

if(wgPageName == "Elephant") { //Check if we are at [[Elephant]]
addOnloadHook(function() {
if(!document.getElementById('pt-userpage')) { //check if is anon
var edit = document.getElementById('ca-edit');

//make it appear to be protected but really isn't
edit.firstChild.innerHTML = "view source";
edit.id= "ca-viewsource";

//Un-comment the next section to make it say a message to anons before editing the page
/* ****
edit.onclick = function() { alert('You are about to edit the page "elephant". Please make your edit wisely!'); };
**** */

//Remove [edit] buttons
document.write('<style type="text/css"> .editsection {display:none;} </style>');
}
});
}

This would be a funny thing to add (and doesn't cause any harm). GeorgeMoney (talk) 23:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hi Tawker, I've been trying to get help with something and I was sent to ask it of you. I've sent you an email about it today, I sent another one a couple of weeks ago but got no reply. Did it show up in your mailbox? Please help, regards, DVD+ R/W 22:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks, but I sent one more email because I've stumbled on something again. DVD+ R/W 23:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, already done. Many thanks again, DVD+ R/W 23:32, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indiana Jones characters

What happened was due to the fact that there was only the prod tag on the page, removing it was seen as a blanking and hence the autorevert. Kind of a very rare situation, I think this is the first time I've had someone point this out (which is amazing in over 8 months of bot operation...) -- Tawker 18:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Tawker. I'm not quite sure what to do about it in the future, but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. :-) — RJH (talk) 18:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inara BBS

Hi! You recently deleted this article that I tagged for speedy deletion. Could you restore the text of the article to the creator's (User:Cg2112) namespace? He's left a message on my talk page and I'd like to go over the article with him. (He also spent a great deal of time writing it, and I'd like to make the text available to him.) Thanks! -- Merope ^Talk 18:58, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of "Construction News"

I see that you protected the page from reconstruction. It popped up a third time, now as "Construction News / Leads", but without the external spam links. Still doesn't look worth saving to me (no context), but before tagging it I thought I'd seek your recommendation on which route to go. Thanks! Akradecki 19:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind...User:NawlinWiki already took care of things. Thanks anyway! Akradecki 19:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

spam user talk pages

I didn't realize I was spamming. Was I really? I was notifying all the people I thought were involved enough in the arbitration case that they could give an informed opinion. I would guess that if what I did *is* spam, the users I spammed would not take it as such. Did you remove any of my messages? Fresheneesz 18:23, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks for letting me know. Just one question.. whats an "opt-in"? Fresheneesz 18:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, ok. But how would one let people know of a place to opt-in? Well, really my question is: what should I have done to let people know about the arbitration case? Fresheneesz 19:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this and wondered about it. I have sometimes notified every possible concerned person on an issue. I did not think that was a bad thing. I do not understand why this should be a bad thing. For example, I appreciated knowing the my input was desired. Could you please show me where it is contrary to policy to notify people like this and related discussions? --Blue Tie 01:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In short, the policy exists (it's on the books somewhere but it's 5:38 AM and I'm half asleep) to ensure that one does not make it appear that a consensus one way or another exists if it does not. If one makes a post to supporters of one size of a dispute (and using wording such as "outraged") it tends to swing support one way or another - thats not building consensus, it's playing a political game of supporters gathering.

I hope that makes sense... I need to go visit Starbucks now :)

It sort of makes sense and it sort of does not. I think if all interested parties are brought to the table the results are better than if they are left off. I believe in letting everyone notify as many people as they wish. I also believe that if a person arrives at the discussion by invitation they should specify that and mention who invited them so that "meat puppetry" can be avoided. Incidentally, with email and IRC, the prohibition against such notification only affects those who do not use these other venues... and I would point out... that THOSE are SECRET! Better if it is all up and in the open.

I would appreciate it if you could find the policy but I will understand if you are too busy and will not consider it any sort of affront, slight or lack of attention. --Blue Tie 17:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw discussion about this while reading the WP:RFARB case on User:Fresheneesz. I'm also concerned because I have spammed article talk pages to get votes on an issue at a particular article page. To make this more concrete, there is a dispute going on at Erika Steinbach and I publicized the vote on Talk:Expulsion of Germans after World War II. My description of the issue was very neutral and did not advocate one side of the vote or the other. I presume this is acceptable behavior? I think the transgression on Fresheneesz's part was appearing to drum up support on only one side of the issue and targeting specific users instead of wider user communities such as all editors who watch a certain article talk page. Do you agree with my interpretation? --Richard 03:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have found a the policy page Wikipedia:Survey notification. It has been deactivated and is no longer in effect. However, WP:SPAM discusses it. It seems like the key is fairness. --Blue Tie 20:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sandstorm Enterprises

Hi. We cleaned up the Sandstorm Enterprises web page. Does it now meet with your approval? 140.247.62.201 15:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

TawkerbotTorA

Will the bot sign up for Category:Administrators open to recall? What if it unblocks itself - will we take it to RfAr? Some of the oppose votes are funny... - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Calling it a bot

This is a rather serious error. People are opposing it as an unsupervised automated bot, rather than as a watched, limited-time-only, manually operated script. —Centrx→talk • 19:05, 5 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

WP:RFA / WP:RFBOT request

I'm sure you're watching these closely, but can you look at the RFA question I just added regarding possible use of the meta:Proxy_blocking functions to achieve this result? Thanks, — xaosflux ^Talk 01:23, 6 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Wikitruth

Your speedy is up for deletion review, FYI. --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope the deletion of this article was a mistake by your bot and not a misguided action on your part. Vivelequebeclibre 04:01, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for deleting the Wikitruth article. In my opinion, this anti-Wikipedia site has been created by multiple hardbanned User:Ted Wilkes alias User:DW alias User:NightCrawler and his many other sockpuppets. DW was under a hard ban since 2003 (see [3]) and "has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, per ruling of administrators, Jimbo Wales", etc. in 2005. See [4], [5]. One of the criticisms against Wikipedia centers on Jimbo Wales and the Wikipedia:Office Actions page which deals with certain legal issues. Ted Wilkes claimed to have much legal knowledge and used this knowledge in his mud-throwing campaign against arbcom member Fred Bauder. Wilkes, who plumed himself on being one of the best and most active contributors to Wikipedia, was blocked by arbcom ruling on 19 March 2006 for one year. See [6]. Is it just mere coincidence that Wikitruth was started shortly after that date, on 20 March 2006? His alias NightCrawler had much trouble with administrator Angela, ironically wishing Angie "WikiLove," etc. See [7], [8]. Significantly, Angela Beesley is attacked on the Wikitruth pages. Furthermore, administrator FCYTravis is one of Wikitruth's whipping boys, perhaps because Ted Wilkes had some trouble with this administrator on the Talk:Nick Adams page. See, for instance, [9]. Wikitruth also frequently claims that too many vandals and trolls "game the system" on Wikipedia. Is it just by chance that Wilkes and his supporter User:Wyss frequently accused user Onefortyone of gaming the system, being a troll, the "most dangerous vandal", etc., falsely claiming that this user's edits were fabricated, unfounded, or unwarranted and therefore must be removed. See [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. Wyss even accused administrator Mel Etitis of being a troll. See [15]. For a summary of the facts, see also [16], [17]. Significantly, Wikitruth is recommended on Wyss's user page. See also [18]. So much for my suspicion concerning the origin of Wikitruth. Therefore, any reference to this biased anti-Wikipedia site should be deleted.

Deletion of Home.co.uk

Noted 18:10, 2 October 2006 Tawker (Talk | contribs) deleted "Home.co.uk" (advert)

Decision seems inconsistent. c.f. existence of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rightmove http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxtons

Indeed, the above could be considered adverts too.

Suggested reason to reverse decision: Home.co.uk publishes the only other counterpart to Rightmoves's asking price index (uk house prices) and is therefore a primary data source. --Dougshephard 10:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Ok, on your talk page then

Just showing up here to request you put my name on the list I mentioned on IRC (seeing as you're a sysop). So you know I easily meet the criteria at the top of that page, just incase you were wondering. :-) Happy editing Tawker --Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 05:00, 8 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Tawkerbot4 unusual revert & vandal warning

Hey, can you check out why I received a Tawkerbot4 warning for this edit? Cheers. Budgiekiller 10:07, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just popped back to see if you had answered, didn't want this to go missing in your five day rolling archive. Budgiekiller 15:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

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. NCurse _work 15:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Just wanted to send a quick note of thanks for your support in my RfA. :-) I really appreciate it! Best, Irongargoyle 17:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Justinian I Award

For unleashing an army of bots against the Vandals, you are awarded the Justinian I Award. --Nlu (talk) 08:09, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AntiVandalBot/Tawkerbot2

Hello Tawker. I'm a spanish wikipedia user, and I'd like to know if it should be posible to adapt the anti-vandalism bot to use it in the spanish wikipedia. I have seen it in RC and it's an incredible tool to fight vandalism. (Is it programmed in python, as most of the tools for WP?) Thanks in advance! Er Komandante 05:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Tawker, I didn't see the requests page, I apologize for the inconvenience. Er Komandante 15:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of "vandalism"

You on the sixth of October reverted the edit we made to the articleColumbus Alternative High School (as the user And another blight unto the world., admitadly almost every edit we have ever made has been untter and blatant vandalism, however this single edit wasn't, we changed "Advanced Placement" to "Advanced Placement Program", a minor edit yes, but a valid one.

This is a meaningless complaint we admit, and it would not be unwarranted to ban this account immediately, however we find it annoying that you reverted our edit to an edit that had the principles name reading "Fucking Retard" (this has since been reverted).

We don't know why we're even bothering complaining, and feel free to ban us, we'll deserve it eventually, but for the sake of the little credibility this shit hole has, don't do blind reversions, you never know what might be reverted.

We have fixed your mistake, that will be all.--The Blight People 16:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

RfA thanks from StuffOfInterest

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which finished with a tally of 52/6/1 (~90%). It was an interesting process which gave me a chance to learn a bit about myself and about the community. My intention now is to slowly ease into using those additional buttons on my page. No use being over eager and mucking up the works. The support of all those who went over my record and/or rallied to my defense after the big oppose vote was instumental to the success of this review. Again, thank you! --StuffOfInterest 12:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Email request

Hi, I am running in Italian Wikipedia a bot written by me called RevertBot that does same job of Tawkerbot2. I should like to see your pattern list since we receive vandalism from English people also. I can give you to compare patterns used by us when they are in mature status. Cheers, --F. Cosoleto 13:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Closing Afd

I don't suppose you could close this Afd for me? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wagon Wheel (biscuit) There seems to be consensus for a speedy keep. --Dweller 18:11, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tawkerbot4 malfunctioning

I've temporarily blocked Tawkerbot4 (talk · contribs) due to malfunctioning. It was reverting out of nowhere and incorrectly attributing edits to users - both the reverted edits and those it reverts to. AntiVandalBot (talk · contribs) was also suffering the same problem, which can be seen in the edit history of 2006 North Korean nuclear test.

You might want to check what's going on.

Update: I've noticed that AntiVandalBot was blocked by another administrator for the same reason. --Ixfd64 00:58, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I've unblocked both bots for now. Let's hope that they work properly now. :) --Ixfd64 01:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've also noticed that the malfunction seems to be associated with vandalism by IPs in the 207.200.116.* range. I seriously hope that those vandals aren't abusing some sort of bug. --Ixfd64 01:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Hey Tawker-- I blocked the bot because it still appears that it is claiming that anons have made 4 vandalism edits in 24 hours, though they have only committed 2 or less. Keep me posted, AdamBiswanger1 04:06, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi Tawker, would you be able to block 13569 (talk · contribs)? (see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Snle) Thanks! —Khoi khoi 04:45, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I think you mixed 56352 up with 13569. :-) —Khoi khoi 05:06, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was really fast. —Khoi khoi 05:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing images warnings

Hi, Tawker. What do you mean by "f/u noted" in the recent edit summaries for some image pages, where you have removed both the {{ifd}} and the {{db-i3}} tags? --Abu Badali 19:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look while cleaning up CSD it looks like the images are used solely in the players bio and as such, would fit under fairuse -- Tawker 20:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, Tawker, but even if your rationale was correct, it's not a reason for removing a {{ifd}} tag.

You may want to know that, according to item #1 of Wikipedia:Fair use criteria, we can only claim fair use for unrepeatable images. It's very easy for someone to take a picture of a futball player and released under a free license. So, we don't accept unfree images on these cases. Item #8 of Wikipedia:Fair use#Counterexamples deals exactly with that. That's why some user put that images on ifd.

But the images were in CSD because they license allow only for non-commercial use, which is itself a criteria for speedy deletion, regardless of how the images are used.

With all due respect, I'm going to revert your editions on these images. Let me know if you have any problems with that. Best regards, --Abu Badali 21:30, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Apples are not oranges

I was not seeking to hold you to Tawkerbot2 promises in relation to TawkerbotTorA. My point is that (from my impression of Essjay's much-linked comment) you had previously made promises about the capabilities of a previous bot, and then failed to keep those promises. Since you failed to keep promises about the capabilities of a previous bot, there is no reason for me to believe that you will keep your promises about the capabilities of this bot. Cynical 19:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer to your question is yes (sorry to be brief, I've got a lot to do at the moment). Cynical 20:25, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that's a brutally long RfA. Hence, I made that comment to remind you that I had some questions unanswered. It's the chunk/paragraph right above the latest comment, beginning with "I have some new questions regarding issues brought up since I last commented." Because it's from a few days ago, some of it may have been addressed elsewhere, but I would still like to hear your (and Werdna's) replies. Thanks a lot! Flcelloguy (A note?) 01:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! I'll reconsider the RfA in a minute, if it hasn't closed by now. :-) Thanks again! Flcelloguy (A note?) 01:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The da Vinci Barnstar

For your tireless efforts at making the Tawkerbot family a reality and related sysop work, it is my honor to award you this da Vinci Barnstar. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFBOT

I've left you a question about how you want to proceed with your request at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/TawkerbotTorA. Thanks, — xaosflux ^Talk 17:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia:Campaign for less bull more writing" now on MfD

Your prod was contested by another user, so I started Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Campaign for less bull more writing. Andrew Levine 22:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PING

I got your reply, and it seems we need to have more BAG and community consensus on a lot of these issues. I've started up a discussion thread at Wikipedia_talk:Bots/Requests_for_approval#Admin_Bots, do you feel it is approriate? As for your bot request, I doubt its going to be able to go anywhere without refactoring its scope until that discussion gets moving (and its tasks could always be expanded later)...several people in the RFA (and the closing 'crat) recognize now that WP:OP is something that needs more assistance, and at the least a bot generated list may be useful. Although I was a pretty vocal detractor on the RFA, please don't take it personally (I even put a disclaimer at the top of that RFA), I think you're a great admin, just that the tech details should get worked out first. If we can get all of the WP:BAG members on board, a future RFA will be more likely to pass. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TB2

Nope, I'm running windows. No way to run a TB2 clone? --Daniel Olsen 05:32, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Damn. When there's a windows version out, look me up and I'd be glad to run it and fight the good fight automatically. Back to VP for me... --Daniel Olsen 05:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA question

lol thanx. i wondered about essjay; but oh well. thanks Teh tennisman 01:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikipediaWeekly

You sound nothing like I imagined. Haha. Interesting idea, btw. – Ch acor 09:47, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: ROFL at the backslash in the subheader for the WikipediaWeekly site. – Ch acor 09:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Non-Notability

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Non-Notability. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Non-Notability/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Non-Notability/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, -- Drini 22:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply

I'll use a speedy tag next time. Thanks --BostonMA ^talk 00:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

G1 vandalism

Doesn't sound HORRIBLE :) I think the best place for this to start may be with a new bot request (task expansion) to TAG the articles. Would even supoprt getting them in to the main CAT:CSD AND a new category (maybe something like Category:Candidates for speedy deletion/Bot Reported like how AIV is working now). During trial testing you could use just the temp category to get a feel for it. CAT:CSD gets a lot of backlog these days, so testing would need to be pretty extensive to avoid flooding it and anoying lots of admins! As for having a bot start deleting articles, that soudns better as phase 2, and after that last RFA, WP:RFBOT completion looks like a better starting point. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the logic routines wouldn't be to bad, I could see this easily also doing U1, U2, R1, and G8 CSD's (the most obvious ones), and coupled with your existing vandalism engine, it could even grow to G3's {New Page vandalism only). — xaosflux ^Talk 01:25, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly

Just thought I'd leave my message here, since you're not online on MSN and I'm spending the day studying tomorrow (ugh)...

For Wikipedia Weekly, are you considering adding in pre-recorded 5-minute segments, like how they have segments on radio shows? I'm thinking of possibly doing something for the Weekly at some point, but as you know, I rarely have much time at the computer nowadays. Because I was thinking of doing something for it, but not "live." -→Buchanan-Hermit ™/?! 07:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Bot

Hey mate, I asked Cyde about this and didn't get a response (yet), but I am planning to start a bot that basically does the same thing as Tawkerbot (2?) does; reverting vandalism, but I have no idea as to how to get the mecanics working, how to get it flagged, etc. Could you help me! Thank you! — $PЯINGε rαgђ 23:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC) P.S. If you don't normally, can you also reply on my talk page?[reply]

Actually none, since I have no bot of my own yet. — $PЯINGε rαgђ 04:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I really have no idea. I don't really know how to explain it on a technical level, but after looking here, I can see kind of what each .py does, but the only one I really found that edits articles is this one. Sorry if I'm not making any sense. :| — $PЯINGε rαgђ 04:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Belgrade

Thanks, man. --estavisti 05:53, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tawkerbot2

Stop your bot reverting Snoop Dogg edits into a vandalized version. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me} 16:59, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And the same for AntiVandalBot... Lajbi ^{Holla @ me} 17:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rightmove

A deletion review has been opened on this article that you deleted. Your comments would be appreciated. Thanks! Mango juice^talk 17:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand

I don't understand your comment on my talk page. Please demonstrate via an example, please. thnx. --Endgame1 03:56, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Back Log that the janitors have to clean since they are admins???? --Endgame1 04:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Appologies for "Janitor comment" I did know were an admin with blocking powers :).--Endgame1 04:19, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tawkerbot2 clone

I would like to host a Tawkerbot2 clone to revert vandalism. Would you let me do so? --Exir Kamalabadi ^{Join Esperanza!} 13:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

I saw your message on User talk:Disambiguation. The block was probably premature, but I'm suspicious of "Disambiguation", who I think is the sock-puppet of someone who has been making quite aggressive edits on Manchuria-related topics. For more information see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Snle. --Niohe 14:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk deletion

[19] I don't quite understand why you deleted the user's talk page. In your deletion summary, you said "he's blocked, end of story". He's only blocked for 24 hours, so umm...enlighten me? Nishkid64 23:30, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay. Thanks for the speedy response. Nishkid64 23:38, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tawker you about?

Can you take a look at User talk:Garglebutt for me please? Specifically his 3rr links, thanks Glen 07:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know, that user has just accused you of being a sockpuppet of CSCWEM. "I also note that the clown guy has reverted the article at least as many times as me using two userids"... Daniel .Bryant 07:24, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox 2 not released

Firefox 2 has not been released yet, please undo your change to the {{In the news}} template. — Ian Moody ^(talk) 17:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to Asa Dotzler it's not planned to release it until tomorrow. Also should it be in the template anyway? IE7 wasn't and that is arguably much more news worthy. — Ian Moody ^(talk) 18:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sahaja Yoga International

You recently deleted an article after an afd, fair enough. But did the fact that the editors who opposed it's keeping propose to merge Sahaja Yoga International with Sahaja Yoga mean nothing? It seems that you followed your own ideas on the matter in this case, and deleted the article outright, removing editor's hard work which could have been salvaged and merged into Sahaja Yoga. Can you explain this? Sfacets 23:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Re: TB2

I'm still interested in obtaining the code. What needs to be done? --Xoid 04:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Thank you

Thank you for your input on my RfA last month. In a few months after I graduate, I'll have time to "prepare," (I won't be on Wikibreak next time) and visit xFD everyday. I had planned on nominating myself in late spring, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to accept a nomination. Do you have any tips or suggestions for me? Thanks again, X [Mac Davis] (SUPERDESK|Help me improve) 07:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Today's featured article

Just wanted to let you know a featured article you worked on, 0.999..., was featured today on the Main Page. Tobacman 00:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks dude :) Quadrant666

User:HailHitler

Why did you block him? It isn't a Username vio. True, Hitler was a horrible person, but just because you think so or because alot of people who speak English think so, doesn't mean he should be blocked. If you ask me, I think the block is pretty biased.--Koji Dude ^{(Contributions)} 02:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Koji, it was a clear vandal account with a name designed to be offensive. If it makes you feel any better, I was about to block it and he beat me to the block. JoshuaZ 02:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the username was meant to be offensive and inflammatory. While assuming good faith is an asset, I do not believe that particular username was chosen with good intentions. -→Buchanan-Hermit ™/?! 02:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it was a vandalism account, then the block log should state that's the reason for blocking. I'm not trying to start a big long discussion, but if somone signed up with the name "Hail Bush", I don't think he'd be indef'd.--Koji Dude ^{(Contributions)} 02:32, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, they likely would, at least I'd block that -- Tawker 02:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Although in that case the word "hail" has something to do with it (never mind the mispellings). Hitler, Stalin, Jack the Ripper are such obviously disruptive names that they can be blocked as username issues on sight regardless of whether there is a POV to this or not. I have no issue making "biased" blocks based on what is common among Western culture. If this were another language encyclopedia, what the relevant names might be might change but there is no fundamental issue with having "biased" username rules. Userspace is not subject to NPOV among other issues. JoshuaZ 02:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka

Thank you for participating in my recent RfA. Unfortunately consensus was not reached, and the nomination was not successful. However, I do appreciate that you took the time to comment, as I find it a valuable thing to understand how I am perceived by others in the Wikipedia community. If there is anything that I can do in the future to help further address your concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. --Elonka 09:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Please accept my thanks for your support in my successful RfA, which I was gratified to learn passed without opposition on October 25, 2006. I am looking forward to serving as an administrator and hope that I prove worthy of your trust. With my best wishes, --MCB 06:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]