User talk:Tedder/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Pioneer

Did someone disable the Pioneercourthouse vandal filter? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:20, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I dunno. I just gave myself permission to go look into it. I'll report back here. tedder (talk) 18:22, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

If you need to know which one it is, I can tell you. I can't read the contents, of course. But this has happened before. Some sysop decides it's affecting performance, or isn't needed, or something like that, and disables it - and then the vandal pounces. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

175, found it, and I know why it doesn't work. Will take to email. (so, if anyone is reading this and wants to know, email me) tedder (talk) 18:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I just sent you an e-mail. In the course of writing it, I remembered why - I think. You can tell me if I'm right - and what we can do about it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:34, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Protection requests

I come to you directly because it's more than one problem. One individual with many IP accounts (117.., who had been blocked numerous times under different accounts in the past, and now came back again) keeps his sneaky vandalism. This user was known for his constant vandalism, POV edits on different India-related articles and disruptive editing. Yesterday one article was semi-protected because of him. Now he is back at it, and he does it very deviously on the Aishwarya Rai article; he intentionally creates spelling mistakes when he adds something (diff). I reverted the sp. mistakes and corrected the other thing he added (he clearly added it for a reason: to make his sneaky vandalism unnoticed), and he has been reverting me repeatedly. Generally, this article has already been semi-protected many times for very long periods. It is regularly vandalised, generally on a daily basis, so I think a semi-protection is generally very relevant and timely this time as well.

Apart from that, there's something that upsets me even more. I took my time to copyedit and clean up the John Abraham (actor) article which was more of a fansite. He started reverting me here too (calling my edits vandalism). I reverted him, but I'm sure he'll keep doing that. I'm fed up. I don't how much the WP:RBI can be followed when this individual keeps coming with a new IP address every hour.

I request you to semi-protect these articles. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:17, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi- I understanding coming directly, but you should probably go to WP:EAR or WP:ANI for this. It's too complicated for me to handle (considering I'm a newbie with the mop). It might be possible to use WP:3RR in this situation, but I don't have enough confidence to jump into this (yet!). Cheers, tedder (talk) 19:29, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, but his edits are complete vandalism, so 3RR is not really relevant here. An article was protected yesterday because of his editing and today you see that his edits are vandalism. He has had many user accounts on Wikipedia, all of which were blocked. Just see the John Abraham history, all my copyedits, around 20 edits were reverted twice. And the Aishwarya Rai article is anyway a constant object of IP vandalism (see the history of today). Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:32, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The edits I looked at (like this) can't be classified as complete vandalism; they can be classified as incorrect and POV, but not vandalism. What are the blocked account(s)? tedder (talk) 19:37, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

What? It is not editing. It's an absolute revert of all my copyedits! So it's not vandalism? Many accounts, it was two-three months back, and most of them were blocked by User:YellowMonkey (he happens to have a checkuser). But it's not relevant now when I spend time to copyedit an article which looks a fansite (just see how it looked before), it gets reverted by a vandal who is also a well-known sock-puppet, and an admin tells he cannot help me with it. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Shahid, I understand the frustration. And an admin should be able to help you, but probably not me. Again, I just became an admin a week ago, and I don't want to stomp around and cause trouble. So please don't take it personally, but if you file at WP:ANI, you should get a response rather quickly. tedder (talk) 19:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I understand. Well, congrats on the successful RFA, and all the best in your work as an admin. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and sorry I can't help out more. tedder (talk) 20:00, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The Fox and the Hound

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello, I can understand The Fox and the Hound being put under protection until other issues are resolved, but what I'd like to know is whether or not my clean-up was acceptable. It's had a Cleanup tag since last week — inserted by User talk:Collectonian herself — and that is all I did: improve the grammar, split some of the paragraphs in order to make them easier to read, and provided some additional information about the film characters appearing in the comics. User talk:Collectonian refuses to discuss the matter with me on principle but what I'd like to know is this: if the edits had been done by someone other than myself, would they have been accepted? Your opinion would be welcome. Thank you.--Marktreut (talk) 20:06, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Marktreut, I'm not willing to get into a content dispute, especially with a sockpuppet investigation going on. tedder (talk) 20:33, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

As noted on the talk page, the clean up tag is purely because of the issues with the references and could just as easily be removed. You didn't improve anything with your edits. The paragraphs are already in good format and breaking them up reversed earlier clean up done by good editors. And the "comics" section you added was referenced to a copyright violating, non-reliable source. And its not that I refuse to discuss with good editors, I refuse to discuss with you specifically because you are sockpuppeting and wikihounding and engage in numerous other bad editing practices. I have yet to see you make a decent contribution anywhere. And yes, I would have reverted those edits by anyone else as they degraded the article, not improved, and go against the MoS. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 20:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Request for Protection

I would appreciate if you could post a Protection lock on my biography page Shahriar Afshar, as well as the its discussion page, due to a recent breach of confidentiality that has caused confidential information to be posted on my biography page. I cannot discuss the details here, but if you e-mail me, I would be happy to explain. Looking forward to hearing from you soon. Best regards. --Prof. Afshar (talk) 23:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Replying via email, removed email address to avoid spam. tedder (talk) 02:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiBacon results

Yeah, I'm posting on my own talk page as a placeholder for others. I've been running User:TedderBot with some initial results from my WikiBacon project over here: User:TedderBot/Bacon Results. Post feedback, concerns, and requests here. And yes, I'm engaging in some minor canvassing to get the conversation going. tedder (talk) 01:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Aha, the Kevin Bacon syndrome. It could also be handy for pinpointing where first encountering characters like User:Tecmobowl, may he rest in pieces. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:07, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Indeed- want me to run it against you two? tedder (talk) 02:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

And just to show you how my right-brain works, your wikibacon blurb inspired me to make an update to The Twelve Days of Christmas. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:09, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The article? I'm confused.. tedder (talk) 02:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

It got me to thinking about bacon, so I checked that article to see if they have anything about "kosher bacon" (they don't) and then I saw a reference to "back bacon" that reminded me of a reference to that in the McKenzie Brothers' variation on "The Twelve Days of Christmas". That's not exactly 6 degrees of wiki-bacon, but it's in the neighborhood. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:26, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah. The crazy way our minds work, eh? (and look above- want me to run it between you and Tecmobowl?) tedder (talk) 02:29, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The wife hates it when I go off on one of those Baconesque tangents. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, not really. I'm fairly certain where I first ran into him (speaking of train wrecks). Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:32, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

It was probably in either Black Sox scandal or Curse of the Black Sox. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:34, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, go ahead and run it. (Grimace). Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 02:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Wrong on both guesses- first article was Eddie Cicotte. results here. tedder (talk) 03:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

That would fit also. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 08:28, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey Tedder, I looked at the bot output you shared -- it's very cool! It would be nice to have a bit more description of the two "modes" -- I don't quite understand what the two categories are. Is one purely chronological, listing the first time that the two people edited the same page, then the second time, etc. -- and then the other one lists the time when they edited in closest succession, followed by the second-closest succession, etc.? If so, I think there must be a clearer way to express that. But all in all, a neat tool, and one that seems versatile enough that it might have any number of applications. Personally, I'm planning to fire it into the middle of the next RFA I find and watch everyone scatter! Bwahhaha. I'm funny. -Pete (talk) 16:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Here are some specific suggestions. (I like the "bacon" reference, did not get it the first time!)

User Baseball Bugs and Tecmobowl have edited 163 unique articles together.

REWRITE AS: 163 articles have been edited by both X and Y.

This is the "time distance" between the two users. In other words, this shows collaboration or edit wars between the users.

REWRITE AS: Among pages that both people have edited, this list shows the pages where their edits were closest in time. This usually reveals periods of close collaboration or edit wars between the two editors.

Article: User talk:Tecmobowl (time between edits: 34 seconds) Edit #1 by Baseball Bugs (diff) at 2007-06-24T16:29:39Z Edit #2 by Tecmobowl (diff) at 2007-06-24T16:30:13Z

Might consider bolding "time between edits" to make it clear what's being used to rank the entries. Also, instead of using the word "diff," I'd suggest just linking the text "Edit by Baseball Bugs" and "Edit by Tecmobowl". Also remove the fairly meaningless "#1" and "#2".

This shows the first time a user edited in articles the other user has already edited in. This shows when the user's paths first crossed.

REWRITE AS: Among pages that both people have edited, this list shows the pages where both made edits the earliest, without regard to how soon one edit was after the other. This may be useful in determining when the two editors first "met" one another.

(similar tweaks to the individual entries)

-Pete (talk) 16:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Let's WP:AGF and leave comments about "edit wars" out of anything posted by the bot.

And, as it's still planned to use it as a weapon at RfA[1] I'd like that issue of whether the community wants another "weapon" for "the arsenal" raised at WP talk:RfA before the bot is offered as a weapon. --69.226.103.13 (talk) 18:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

How about more value-neutral "close interaction between users," instead of "collaboration" or "edit wars"? -Pete (talk) 18:09, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Neutral works, I like "close interaction". I'll have some changes made to it today.

IP 69.226.103.13, since you are having trouble maintaining decorum, I've asked you before to stay off my talk page, and to take it to ANI if you consider that abuse. Please don't post further. tedder (talk) 18:24, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Pete- what do you think now? I missed two words in the intro ("77 unique articles have.."). I appreciate the feedback, considering I tend to write English like I code. tedder (talk) 20:28, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Better! It's a complicated concept to put in words..fairly technical. Think there might still be room for improvement/clarity, but I'm stumped as to how. But what you have will definitely work. The more I'm thinking about this, the more I'm realizing how useful it will be...I routinely run into situations where I just can't quite remember where I know somebody from. This will be a great er, trowel to have in the garden shed. -Pete (talk) 05:45, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

You have asked for feedback. So, I love this concept, which will obviously be incredibly useful both in ordinary interactive editing and in admin work. When can I have it? --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 15:05, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like positive feedback, Anthony, eh? Feel free to make a few requests here; otherwise I'll have an interface up in the next week or so. tedder (talk) 06:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Avon Lake High deletion

Why was my contribution to notable alumni deleted again after I reverted it yesterday? I cannot understand why Larry Cox is being deleted. Amnesty International is a well-respected human rights organization (non-profit, as well. I have placed the same contribution and link with links to the Amnesty International article. It has not been removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Csturgeo (talk • contribs) 14:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Csturgeo. I deleted Mr. Cox because his name is currently linked to a sports player on Wikipedia: Larry Cox. Having a wikipedia article is a common shortcut to establishing notability of an individual. The best course of action would be to create the article on Larry Cox (human rights) and then re-add him. Cheers, tedder (talk) 12:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Happy Tedder/Archive 3's Day!

User:Tedder/Archive 3 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Tedder/Archive 3's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Tedder/Archive 3! Peace, Rlevse ~ A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Aw, thanks Rlevse! tedder (talk) 06:21, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Dudes 'n' stuff

I'm glad my edit summary brought a semi-laugh. It gets difficult at times around here, I must say, especially when it concerns people widely considered to be one of the greatest actors of all time and my being an anti-al and all. Thanks for squelching the issue. I was going to go to AN/I when they decided tomorrow to once again return the less than well-sourced content. Fanboys, I think. I'd be glad to do a little talk page housekeeping on the Pacino talk page. I usually end up doing that at some point when I've had to post much to a talk page. In other stuff, congratulations on acquiring the tools. I'm not at all convinced being an administrator is all it is cracked up to be, and I get too annoyed to ever consider it, but keep the faith. Regards. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and having the tools isn't necessary to be a good Wikipedian (yes, like you). I'm enjoying helping out with RFPP and weird moppish things, like cleaning up really old AFDs.

Back to Pacino, thanks. Normally I'd just do it myself, but I know it's somewhat your domain on Wikipedia and would probably do it with more patience than I would :-) See you around, of course. tedder (talk) 12:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Labh Singh

Thanks for saving the article Labh Singh from recent vandalism and protecting it.

I would like to point towards recent vandalism done by respected editor User:Sinneed. I could not document all of his vandalism points, but following should help to clear out some of his/her vandalism traits.

• In edit 1, User:Sinneed has deleted two very important references and the related text without any discussion. in first reference, third paragraph clearly says "Police said Sukhdev Singh, himself a former police constable, was responsible for a string of murders and a Major Bank Robbery and 2nd reference clearly saysLabh Singh masterminded a bank robbery of Rs. 6 crore from a branch of Punjab National Bank in Ludhiana. This is reputed to be the largest ever bank robber. He has also lied in his edit summary "Source is already a named source in the article, and it doesn't mention the bank robbery. Warning...if I can figure out which of the IP herd made that change easily". This edit summary was a complete lie. Because, as proved above, reference do talk about the bank robbery.
• In edit 2, User: Sinneed has added useless "CN" (alongwith a threatBrief CN for the association with Bhindranwale. I'll drop it today without a source" for Labh Singh's association with Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale), when this reference clearly says that in "early 80s, he came under the influence of Bhindranwale and resigned from the police forc, reference 2 clearly says that ..Labh Singh, a close confederate of (Sant) Bhindranwale's", and in the same page Labh Singh says "I can't show my back to Sant Ji, I will fight with him and face martyrdom in this place.

• here User:Sinneed has simply changed the section "Association with Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale" to "Joining Sikh militants" to further his POV, eventhough above mentioned references clearly prove subject's association with Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale.

• Here User: Sinneed has again lied in his edit summary "source is about that person but doesn't tie to the murder of the publisher" eventhough the reference clearly say that "In Punjab his name figured in the 38 cases of violence taking place between 1983 and 86, including the one in which the editor of the Hind Samachar group of newspaper Ramesh Chander was gunned down in Jalandhar".

Please note User:Sinneed's vandalism is huge. It appears that he is simply destroying the article, killing the references and hard work of other respected editors.--144.160.130.16 (talk) 20:02, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• I look forward to your joining me on the article discussion page.- sinneed (talk) 20:08, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not going to get involved with this- take it to dispute resolution. Thanks. tedder (talk) 20:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

No worries! Thanks again for protecting it. Wiki editors hard work is valuable, atleast it will not get vandalized for some more time. --144.160.130.16 (talk) 21:59, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Danny McBride

Please unlock the page for editing. There are now sources showing his death. [2] BurienBomber (talk) 16:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Please post it to the talk page, and (preferably) find other sources. Besides that one paid publishing source, I haven't found any. tedder (talk) 22:04, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I did post it to the talk page before posting it here. Can you please explain why an obituary in the LA Times is not considered a reliable source? Thanks. BurienBomber (talk) 01:14, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

You did post it there, sorry. I'm on the road and hadn't seen it. The issue is that the source is really legacy.com, not latimes.com. The former site runs "paid obits", which is not the most reliable. See this comment for why it's important to have a more solid source. tedder (talk) 01:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I was perplexed why the source I used to post Mr McBride's untimely death was deemed 'non-notable'. It was factually correct as it turned out - something I would personally have vouched for a few days ago when I first posted the report. The source I used is, in my lengthy experience of these unfortunate occurrences, accurate, timely and reliable. Indeed, I got news of Michael Jackson's demise via thedeadrockstarsclub.com website quicker than via the BBC or Reuters. I appreciate that Wiki is not a news agency, or required by 'its charter' to proclaim births, marriages or deaths in an instant. However, Wiki's creditability is not best served by reports of deaths appearing, disappearing, and then re-appearing in quick succession. Burienbomber (above) states 'that are now sources showing his death' - sure the Los Angeles Trumpet (or whatever) has more clout.... BUT there was a source proclaiming this fact several days ago.

I do appreciate that I am corresponding with another editor, who has no more say in how Wiki operates than I do, but McBride died on 23 July - it is now the 29th ! Just venting my spleen - regards,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I understand venting, and the only say that I have is that I'm the one who locked the article, so I am somewhat forcing the issue. However, because it isn't being reported outside of that website, it's harder to be sure- and if we (as Wikipedia) are going to say someone is dead, we should be really sure, not just "first".

Just because a website is right doesn't mean it is a reliable source. Near the top of the page, WP:BLP says: "We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality references. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." That's the guiding principle I'm using by not unprotecting the article until a very solid source is found. tedder (talk) 01:04, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

SPI post on Bugs page...

... You could always just put out this sign, and hope they find their way to you. ;) — Ched :  ?  22:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, that's how it's done? :-) That's why I buy packs of socks, they all match and I don't care if I lose one or two. Wait, that analogy just broke down completely. Hmm. tedder (talk) 22:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Hard telling about that one, since I'm unfamiliar with its history. I'm much better at finding socks connected with articles I've worked on. I'll take a look. I tell ya one thing - if I were a checkuser, I wouldn't fool around with those guys for long. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Obvious meatpuppet, at least, and the usual sock ploy of "I know this guy but I'm not him". SPI will tell us. It's possible they're different. But if SPI says they're the same, his next move will be to say, "OK we share the same PC," which is another typical sock ploy. Single-purpose accounts, focused on that one guy. That's just my opinion, I could be a loon. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

You are a loon, what does that have to do with the speed of an unladen swallow? :-)

Indeed, the "I know the guy" reminds me of the PCH threat "He'll do bad things.." tedder (talk) 00:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean? An African swallow or a European swallow? Unfortunately, I can't add any actually useful info to the SPI. Those folks are well aware of the typical ploys these guys use. And when the socks essentially own up to it, that makes it easier. The only question now is whether they're willing to do a "sweep" and look for other socks. They might, but because of the narrow impact of it, they might not, unless he comes back again. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 00:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Noticed that you were online

If you wouldn't mind, and feel like flexing your delete tab, could you please delete User:Javert/userChrome.css? Twinkle isn't working and apparently you can't tag .js or .css pages for speedy deletion. Thanks much, javert (stargaze) 01:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Glad to help! tedder (talk) 01:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Splendid. :) I appreciate your help. javert (stargaze) 01:14, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

And on that note, I just noticed there is nobody with Bot experience listed at Wikipedia:Highly Active Users/North America. Just a thought... -Pete (talk) 01:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

That's an interesting list. I don't know that I want to be on it, and I'm certainly not a competent botperson yet.. tedder (talk) 01:53, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

My Editing Was Fine

You see, I've heard many of people call litter boxes sandstorm and shit box. I myself call them that, and therefore I don't think the edit was unconstructive. It seemed fine, and usable to me. Please explain your reasoning. Thanks, you are a great person! --74.39.77.202 (talk) 18:14, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Email

Plz check your email. Thanks!--Afshar (talk) 15:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

reading it. tedder (talk) 17:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Huh?

I have no idea what your comment on my talk page is in reference to. Please clarify? ThuranX (talk) 16:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Wow. I don't have any idea, either. I went through your contribs and my contribs and can't figure out why I left that, or who I really meant it for. Huh. My apologies! tedder (talk) 17:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Now I'm even more confused. ThuranX (talk) 19:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. Me too. Maybe you could do something so it would make sense? Heh. Really sorry, I normally give context, I'm guessing I didn't because it was something like a sockpuppet issue. That's why I should always give context, eh? tedder (talk) 20:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ThaddeusB

I wanted to take a moment to delivery a personal thank you (not "thank spam" :)) for your involvement in my RfA. (It passed 117-2-7 in case you hadn't seen.) I was flattered my your statement that I make "most of us look 'not worthy'", especially considering that you are far from lacing in clue yourself. I certainly will work hard to be that "overwhelming net positive" you envisioned. Feel free to drop me a line about how I'm doing at any time. :)

Thanks again, ThaddeusB (talk) 05:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

List of high schools in Oregon

Hey, your note in reply to my teasing you about your RFA reminded me... Just a heads up, some months ago, when I was doing heavy work on the list of missing Oregon schools and the OSAA page, I had cleaned up the HS list, rearranging the schools by city instead of alphabetically, and untangling all the Portland-area schools with the use of subheaders. It looked really awesome, improved usability and took a long time. But of course my browser crashed and it was late and I didn't have the heart to recreate it and then I got distracted... Anyway, do you have any ideas about how it should look? If I try this again, I'll a) save my work in a text editor and b) run the new-and-improved version by you before I save. I don't want to spring any unwelcome surprises on you! Katr67 (talk) 18:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey. Sorry for the delay- sort of a tl;dr story about the heat and being on my laptop only until it improves.

I don't mind the "county alphasorted" look, though it does get a little messy on the bigger counties. The indented Portland area is sort of a disappointment, because it feels like about half are sorted and the other half are independent.

My problem with subcategorization (in general) is finding a scheme that works and is easy to maintain. The problem with lumping by city is that schools will be near that city, but are actually in a different city, so they'll get lumped elsewhere. For instance, Laurelwood Academy "should" be listed in Eugene, though it's actually in Jasper.

Another method I thought of is sorting by district, as is done in Multnomah County. But how do you deal with CAL?

These are things that make my brain hurt. I'd be inclined to simply alphasort and leave it alone. This is part of why the reqphoto categorization bothers me :-) I won't complain about any system you choose, though some are harder to maintain than others. tedder (talk) 01:16, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Random ramblings

Ignoring you for now. Will get back later today or tomorrow, okay? tedder (talk) 22:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Katr67 (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Just saw the userspace vandalism. Not even creative! What's up with that? I'm across the river hiding from the heat.. tedder (talk) 23:37, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Important question: Are you upwind or downwind from Camas? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 01:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Camas is a place? I thought it was a smell! Yeah, old joke. I'm upwind, in my <sarcasm>favorite city</sarcasm>. tedder (talk) 01:04, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, at least you're into the joke. :) I've been to Oregon a few times, and when I caught a whiff of Camas, it was abundantly clear why they built it well east of Portland. Vancouver, Washington, eh? You might say Vancouver, WA, is to Vancouver, BC, as... well, as Portland, ME, is to Portland, OR. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 01:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Shahriar Afshar

I'm also an admin. I am in contact with Shahriar Afshar via email. Apparently, you have been helping him with his personal info problem. Can you contact me via email (my Wikipedia email button is enabled) to discuss what you've done and what the next steps are? I have directed him to WP:OVERSIGHT as the long-term solution to his problem. I just don't want to get into a situation where the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

--Richard (talk) 17:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll drop you a line. He said he was contacting you. tedder (talk) 17:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I explained my reasons for the removal of non-biographical data from Afshar's page on the talk page, to which there was no response. Please explain there why this material should be restored. --Michael C. Price ^talk 03:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Will do. tedder (talk) 03:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Bajaj Pulsar

I saw that you have reverted the removal ofthe specs of a discontinued model-Pulsar 200. I had removed the details (which I had added when it was under production)- the rationale behind it was that then specs of6 or more previous models of 150 cc and 180 cc should be added. But it seems that even discontinued model specifications are used for bikes- I guess I was wrong afterall:0 PS: I am assuming you are an admin and involved in the motorcycle project- just wanted to know if theres any guideline for providing information about discontinued models?trakesht (talk) 09:00, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Current Events section of House of Yahweh Article

• Context: House of Yahweh

I am in agreement with the removal of the text in your recent edit to the article. [3]

The effort was to prevent the presentation of this previous edit [[4]]. Which appeared to me to be an unnecessary, or rather an incomplete removal of text. An edit that was, at best, an attempt to prevent the "advertisement" appearance of the section. At worst, an attempt to bias the reader's perception of the organization.

I see now that the ref note #4 in the section should have been sufficient in providing the opportunity for the reader to acquire any further information on the expansive subject, should they desire it.

I hope that I was not out of line in my effort. I appreciate your level approach in this matter. Also I would like your take on the removal of the "advertisement" tag. Thanks! 75.93.52.220 (talk) 06:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

List of high schools in Oregon

Hey, your note in reply to my teasing you about your RFA reminded me... Just a heads up, some months ago, when I was doing heavy work on the list of missing Oregon schools and the OSAA page, I had cleaned up the HS list, rearranging the schools by city instead of alphabetically, and untangling all the Portland-area schools with the use of subheaders. It looked really awesome, improved usability and took a long time. But of course my browser crashed and it was late and I didn't have the heart to recreate it and then I got distracted... Anyway, do you have any ideas about how it should look? If I try this again, I'll a) save my work in a text editor and b) run the new-and-improved version by you before I save. I don't want to spring any unwelcome surprises on you! Katr67 (talk) 18:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey. Sorry for the delay- sort of a tl;dr story about the heat and being on my laptop only until it improves.

I don't mind the "county alphasorted" look, though it does get a little messy on the bigger counties. The indented Portland area is sort of a disappointment, because it feels like about half are sorted and the other half are independent.

My problem with subcategorization (in general) is finding a scheme that works and is easy to maintain. The problem with lumping by city is that schools will be near that city, but are actually in a different city, so they'll get lumped elsewhere. For instance, Laurelwood Academy "should" be listed in Eugene, though it's actually in Jasper.

Another method I thought of is sorting by district, as is done in Multnomah County. But how do you deal with CAL?

These are things that make my brain hurt. I'd be inclined to simply alphasort and leave it alone. This is part of why the reqphoto categorization bothers me :-) I won't complain about any system you choose, though some are harder to maintain than others. tedder (talk) 01:16, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Random ramblings

Ignoring you for now. Will get back later today or tomorrow, okay? tedder (talk) 22:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Katr67 (talk) 23:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Just saw the userspace vandalism. Not even creative! What's up with that? I'm across the river hiding from the heat.. tedder (talk) 23:37, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Important question: Are you upwind or downwind from Camas? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 01:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Camas is a place? I thought it was a smell! Yeah, old joke. I'm upwind, in my <sarcasm>favorite city</sarcasm>. tedder (talk) 01:04, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, at least you're into the joke. :) I've been to Oregon a few times, and when I caught a whiff of Camas, it was abundantly clear why they built it well east of Portland. Vancouver, Washington, eh? You might say Vancouver, WA, is to Vancouver, BC, as... well, as Portland, ME, is to Portland, OR. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 01:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Shahriar Afshar

I'm also an admin. I am in contact with Shahriar Afshar via email. Apparently, you have been helping him with his personal info problem. Can you contact me via email (my Wikipedia email button is enabled) to discuss what you've done and what the next steps are? I have directed him to WP:OVERSIGHT as the long-term solution to his problem. I just don't want to get into a situation where the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

--Richard (talk) 17:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll drop you a line. He said he was contacting you. tedder (talk) 17:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I explained my reasons for the removal of non-biographical data from Afshar's page on the talk page, to which there was no response. Please explain there why this material should be restored. --Michael C. Price ^talk 03:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Will do. tedder (talk) 03:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Bajaj Pulsar

I saw that you have reverted the removal ofthe specs of a discontinued model-Pulsar 200. I had removed the details (which I had added when it was under production)- the rationale behind it was that then specs of6 or more previous models of 150 cc and 180 cc should be added. But it seems that even discontinued model specifications are used for bikes- I guess I was wrong afterall:0 PS: I am assuming you are an admin and involved in the motorcycle project- just wanted to know if theres any guideline for providing information about discontinued models?trakesht (talk) 09:00, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Current Events section of House of Yahweh Article

• Context: House of Yahweh

I am in agreement with the removal of the text in your recent edit to the article. [5]

The effort was to prevent the presentation of this previous edit [[6]]. Which appeared to me to be an unnecessary, or rather an incomplete removal of text. An edit that was, at best, an attempt to prevent the "advertisement" appearance of the section. At worst, an attempt to bias the reader's perception of the organization.

I see now that the ref note #4 in the section should have been sufficient in providing the opportunity for the reader to acquire any further information on the expansive subject, should they desire it.

I hope that I was not out of line in my effort. I appreciate your level approach in this matter. Also I would like your take on the removal of the "advertisement" tag. Thanks! 75.93.52.220 (talk) 06:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Sleeping Bear

I regret it and have reverted it. It's uncalled for. Unfortunatly it will live on in the history... Proxy User (talk) 02:54, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I understand- I really do. It happens. Oh well, right? tedder (talk) 02:56, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Erikupoeg

I have reported the ongoing issues with User:Erikupoeg - [here]. Thank you for your participation.--Rubikonchik (talk) --Rubikonchik (talk) 22:14, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Graham Norton

Tedder, I'm responding here to a message you left because I mistakenly made an edit without logging in, and would prefer that if you have a response, you do it in reference to my Kaihoku account, not the IP address. The edit was Graham Norton, regarding him being gay, and my IP was User:69.234.102.28. Basically, you told me I made an edit without sourcing or reference. However, had you looked 2 sentences down you would have seen the reference (where it describes two men that he has dated). Fairly obvious. I had simply put my edit at the beginning of the wrong paragraph. Surely it would have been far easier for you to make that connection and correct that error? Rather than revert it and call it a "vandalism", which it certainly was not, and avoid the hassle of putting a message on the IP page's talk page. Kaihoku (talk) 22:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Kaihoku. Obviously, there's no way I could have known the edit was being made by you, not an IP editor. Having said that, an edit from (what looks like) a new editor stating "Z is openly gay" reeks of vandalism, even if it's true. This is especially true because you did not use an edit summary. For instance, if you said "adding sexuality to lede", it would have been straightforward. But, again, adding four words with zero context really looks like vandalism- especially in a paragraph that now says "Norton is openly gay. In 1988 he was mugged (..)"!

I used Template:Welcomeunsourced, as it's a very friendly greeting to a user- not "this is vandalism", but "a statement such as you posted should give reliable sources". As an experienced editor, obviously you are aware of that and WP:BLP's emphasis on sources; there was no way to expect an IP would be aware of that.

To prevent such an instance from happening in the future, I'd suggest posting a message to the IP talk page indicating it is your "accidental edit" account, and to post to User talk:Kaihoku. Cheers, tedder (talk) 23:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello Tedder. All good points. I'm still surprised you didn't make the connection with the second paragraph-- that would have supplied context. Typically I try to read the whole section before making edits. Anyhow, thanks for the suggestions, reminders and the response. Kaihoku (talk) 03:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

photo request list

I'm going on a 5-week trip to Oregon's Mexico (thanks katr) and will hit a lot of southwest Oregon. Need a photo? Post it to the list below. tedder (talk) 18:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

• (in GPS) Glendale Jr/Sr High School the "pirate high school" tedder (talk) 18:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• (in GPS) Buncom, Oregon LittleMountain5 19:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• (in GPS) Golden, Oregon LittleMountain5 19:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• (in GPS) Seven Feathers Hotel & Casino Resort These would be nice if you get a chance, but don't go out of your way. :) Thanks, LittleMountain5 19:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• (in GPS) Register Guard building off I-5 at Belt Line, west side. That is if you are taking I-5. I didn't know it was there when I went to Eugene on Friday, and then I couldn't figure out how to get there. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
  • We may end up cutting over to the coast at Corvallis- if so, I'll do this in a different trip. tedder (talk) 16:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I just went through that way but didn't stop. Pretty drive, very twisty=fun on a motorcycle? Oregon Route 34/U.S. 20, correct? So...Philomath, Flynn, Alsea, Tidewater, Burnt Woods, Blodgett, Waldport...there are a few other wide spots in the road along there. Alsea has that picturesque-derelict-main-street-buildings thing going on. Katr67 (talk) 21:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Usurpation at no-wiki

The old account has been renamed. Your SUL-account will be created next time ou visit no-wp. Haros (talk) 05:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and  Done tedder (talk) 16:13, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

HD notice

Hello, Tedder. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at WP:HD regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Tool to find all pages which two editors edited. Thank you. --decltype (talk) 11:38, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! replied. tedder (talk) 21:06, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

RFPP request

I am dealing with a sockpuppet abusing his IP talk page, the user is User:MaxPayne87 and the blocking admin is not available. Momo san ^Gespräch 21:05, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll take care of it- in the future, make sure to mention if you've contacted the blocking admin. tedder (talk) 21:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

John Hughes

Thanks for the quick protection on this page. It will make my life much easier. Wperdue (talk) 21:15, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem! tedder (talk) 21:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

More vandalism

The vandal is continuing to create socks or else using sleepers. Can you protect my userpage too? I asked at AN for someone to run a checkuser or block the IP. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 03:25, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done More than happy to do so. Looks like that user is blocked, we'll play whack-a-mole if more pop up. tedder (talk) 03:28, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again. :-) <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 03:31, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Gladly! That's why the tools exist. tedder (talk) 03:32, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Portobelo Ruins and bay.jpg

Hello. I just uploaded your image of Portobelo bay to Commons with your usernime as author, hope you don't mind. Can you remember which fort it was where the photo was taken? Gloria or? --Ukas (talk) 01:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi- I don't mind at all, thanks! The fort was the one on the west end of town, right by the boat launch/dock. I don't know there was more than one; if this isn't enough information, can you give me an EL with a map or info?

Oh, I sort of remember the second one- it's accessed through the city center to the north. Right? I don't have photos of that one. tedder (talk) 01:44, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

There were three forts to start with, recently uploaded this map. Todofierro (Iron castle) was in the North-West corner of the bay, most likely was destroyed, San Jeronimo the smallest fort, probably near the dock in north and Gloria I think south from the town. These forts originally continued as smaller fortifications with gun positions and such, and my memory of the place doesn't help me at all. I think your photo is probably from San Jeronimo. --Ukas (talk) 14:26, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. It's probably Gloria, though I'm not 100%. I remember that it was at the road entrance to town and there was some sort of ruins on thie hillside. Based on the map you indicated, that would be Gloria. Jeronimo still exists, but IIRC is partially submerged and used by locals to launch canoes and such. The port/dock is at the entrance to town, which also indicates Gloria. tedder (talk) 16:05, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

You're probably right. There's another image in commons Portobelo.jpg, which is categorized under Castillo Santiago de la Gloria. Does this look familiar? --Ukas (talk) 00:11, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Ukas, that looks like the same place. Obviously it's OR at this point, but I'd tend to believe it :-) tedder (talk) 01:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

With this information I feel pretty safe to use it in Finnish article of the battle of Portobelo, thanks for your help. --Ukas (talk) 03:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Thanks buddy ;) — Ched :  ?  02:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

De nada. Sometimes, I enjoy following RFPP more than sorting out the issues themselves :-) tedder (talk) 02:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Exotic Magazine

Hello Tedder. Thank you for assisting in removing the speedy deletion. I agree that the Exotic's entry needs to be turned into a stub as my original entry was upsetting many in the way it sounded like an advertisement. Truly, that was not my intention. I actually thought I was assisting to improve Wikipedia as when I was reading the Portland, Oregon entry and saw Exotic mentioned under the Media subsection with a RED link, I figured I should make a small page for people that wished to know more about it. I wrongly assumed that since there was an "intention" of a link but no page created, I should step-up to the plate. In fact, when I clicked the red link, it took me to a "no page exists.. create this page" and so I attempted to do so.

Obviously, the stub is very very basic now and if you need any further information to assist in adding to the stub, please feel free to ask me. At this point, I feel it is better to stay away from editing the page as it seems to spark massive COI rants. I will say that you can use the previous information that is NOT deemed as advertising (perhaps rewrite it a bit) as it is wholly owned by Exotic Magazine (assumed business name) / XMAG LLC. (the parent company) and I am the single managing member of XMAG LLC. If a formal email needs to be sent, please direct me as to what it needs to contain and where it needs to be sent.

My apologies for any early contention on my part but clearly, I'm fairly passionate about this. Not only because it is my "baby" but I feel it is being attacked unfairly. Initially, I assumed you were not being evenhanded in your approach as well, but now I have realized that you are just trying to operate along Wikipedia's guidelines. Thank you and again, any assistance, direction or advice you can offer will be greatly appreciated. bryan (talk • contribs) 19:16, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Bryan -- saw your note here, hope you don't mind if I butt in. I can appreciate where you are coming from, and will readily admit that Wikipedia as a whole does not deal cleanly with this sort of situation -- frequently leading to frustration on the part of people in your position. If I'm one of the people who seemed to be attacking you, I hope you will accept my apologies -- that was not my intent.

As for reproducing material from your marketing kit, we actually have a procedure set up for exactly that sort of situation. See this page. Please note, however, that (1) you must release the text for use in any venue, not just Wikipedia (sounds strange, I know, but there are good reasons for that) and (2) providing this permission, as you probably understand by now, isn't likely to get the content included; it merely removes one technical hurdle to including some of it.

Feel free to contact me directly/privately if you like. -Pete (talk) 19:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Bryan. Yes, having a redlink indicates people are hoping the article will exist, but it must still follow Wikipedia's standards. I may add information back, but I'll probably wait until the article for deletion wraps up. At least we can have a long discussion about it, rather than having it speedied. I can tell you are passionate about it, but Wikipedia's pillars must still be followed.

You'll probably still be needed to edit the article, but pay attention to the feedback you've gotten on the AFD and the talk page. It comes down to one thing: reliable sources are needed to establish notability. I suspect you're having trouble grasping what Wikipedia means by reliable sources- if so, feel free to ask. I'm more than willing to help you out.

Note it isn't a content issue- most of us are laissez-faire liberal types- but we are sticklers that Wikipedia isn't used to promote businesses, that new articles follow all of Wikipedia's standards, and so on. Cheers, tedder (talk) 19:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Bug

Hello. I saw on a talk page that a script you use marked a comment as being written by me. I did not write the comment, I only replied to it before your script found it. I think this is a bug in the script's logic. Thanks.--TParis00ap (talk) 18:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, it wasn't a script, it was a human :-) I marked the first comment as being from someone else- your comment was signed, theirs wasn't. tedder (talk) 19:23, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I fixed it to show the right person. I just figured you used one of those scripts to do it.--TParis00ap (talk) 22:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj

I don't know why you rejected my rfpp request, I don't understand why you just reverted vandalism to the Nicki Minaj article yourself, I don't understand why at least 5 different IPs were vandalizing the page just yesterday alone, I don't understand why you don't think the obnoxious personal attacks are not block worthy, but would you please protect Nicki Minaj? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 02:15, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I understand the frustration, but ignoring the one blocked IP, the level of vandalism isn't very high. I started watching the page because you were frustrated. However, WP:ROUGH makes it clear what level of vandalism is required. tedder (talk) 02:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

the john fisher school

look at the talk. theres an argument —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.193.64.106 (talk) 12:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

To put this comment by 69.193.64.106 in context, this is one of the suspected (but alternating) IPs (beginning 69....) who has repeatedly engaged in mass deletion of text and, apart from one unhelpful comment on the The John Fisher School talk page today (I guess this happened because he was prevented from making his edit by the semi-protection!), has refused to engage in any dialogue on the issue.

Please know, Tedder, that Wikipedia editors such as myself and Sayerslle will appreciate the semi-protection you installed on The John Fisher School page. Let's hope for a period of calm. Thank you. Marlon232 (talk) 13:08, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep, it's pretty easy to sniff out. tedder (talk) 16:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I have nothing to do with any other IP. I even checked the locations and their far away from me. marlon is making bad faith accusations and edit warring. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.193.64.106 (talk) 02:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Tedder, can you please take a look at The John Fisher School page when you have time. It appears the IP has now got himself a registered account and is creating havoc. Thanks. Marlon232 (talk) 13:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I have had a registered account for a long time. stop assuming bad faith. Husounde (talk) 14:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

In any case, you are both violating WP:3RR. Leave it alone. Take the anything productive to the talk page, but stop edit warring. tedder (talk) 15:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, sorry. I should of been more constructive earlier on. Thanks nevertheless.Marlon232 (talk) 15:47, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

The Way of All Flesh (album)

I would like to thank you personally for semi-protecting that page for one week. It is truly appreciated. I'm just going to tell you that I've never had the attitude that certain articles were mine, if that is what you were saying with the phrase "be careful of ownership". I did like reading that wikipedia page on ownership, though, so thanks for that. I did know that article ownership is not a good practice on wikipedia, but that page did make me more aware of this principle than I was beforehand. It is nice to know that I won't be likely to deal with such a dispute within the next seven days, and hopefully never again. Backtable^{Speak to Me}about what I have done 21:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. The reason I brought up WP:OWN is that it appears your time has been spent protecting the "right" version, even though the information is not reliably sourced. You appear to be entirely correct- but it'd be better to improve the article so the violations are clearer than "you haven't listened to the music". tedder (talk) 21:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, that's cool. I own the album, and I plan on sourcing its liner notes soon to back up this information, along with information I plan on introducing from the liner notes at that time. I did source blabbermouth to back up my claim, but I do realize that that page needs more sources than just blabbermouth, which is something that I will fix with the aforementioned plans for the article. Backtable^{Speak to Me}about what I have done 21:43, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your Big Brother Help

I was really trying to fix that stupid chart so thanks for helping. I don't even know who though put down Natalie as having been evicted. But yeah, thanks :) User:Revan46 01:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't even know anything about Big Brother, the last episode I watched was sometime in the first season. But it came up on WP:RFPP, so I tried to help a little. tedder (talk) 03:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Backstreet Boys

Hi Tedder, I saw that you protected this article, while I wasn't involved in most of the edit warring, I did do one revert at the end because the one editor continual reverted an IP's edits for no good reason. I did leave a message at that user's talk page inquiring about why they continued to do so, as there was no discussion on the talk page about it. It is worth noting that the user did warn the anon-ip about test edits, however it looks like the anon-ip was right in making their changes. Just wanted you to know my role in the whole thing (hate to get in trouble for something I was only peripherally involved in!) Frmatt (talk) 07:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your bad faith Frmatt! Source used is a site map not an article (Therefore not reliable) and the Anon-IP keeps changing IP's so clearly disrupting the article. Bidgee (talk) 08:02, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Settle down, folks. The "article" listed appears to be a 404. So it should be removed. Period. Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass. In other words- move on, we are (almost) all on the same side, okay? tedder (talk) 08:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

The article listed was simply missing the letter "l" at the end of the URL, and a simple google search found the problem almost immediately. It appears to be fixed on the article now, so we should probably leave it in. Bidgee: In the future, if you could make comments to me at my talk page, and not on a third party's talk page, I would greatly appreciate it. Frmatt (talk) 08:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Look it's not up to me to see if someone did a typo in a source, same goes for when someone add unsourced content (It's not up to me to source it). And please don't tell me were I should or should reply or tell me what to do, thank you. This is the last comment I'll be making on this. Bidgee (talk) 08:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Settle down, Bidgee. You are a good editor who was right (in dealing with an incorrect link). Go take a coffee break, come back and work on this again constructively. tedder (talk) 08:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Both of you, go to Talk:Backstreet Boys and let me know if you need help as an admin or mediator (I can protect or unprotect, I can ban, I can love). tedder (talk) 08:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Black Veil Brides

Maybe worth salting? ^Bongo_matic 08:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no {{talkback}} or other comment on my talk page is required.

Yep, it'll probably start tasting salty soon. I'd prefer to wait another round, though. Especially if it helps us find out some details of the sockpuppetry that are setting it up. tedder (talk) 08:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

How about.......

What do you think about deleting this shrine? WP:DENY and all. I was going to bring it to WP:MFD but then thought I would boldly speedy it if you agreed. It can always be maintained in deleted history if need be. Wknight94 ^talk 14:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Wk. I understnad why you'd feel that way, but my experience is that the socks come up often enough to cause trouble. With the page semi-protected, they'll come to the talk page and start engaging users who don't know about the situation. The LTA report is an easy, low-energy way to point AGF users in that direction.

Otherwise, we end up reinventing the wheel every time a sock comes along and asks why the page is protected, claiming to have some valuable information to add to it. tedder (talk) 16:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

It is rather tedious to have to explain what's going on to someone unfamiliar with the situation who is assuming good faith on the troll's latest sock. It can end up wasting a lot of time. But maybe enough folks are familiar enough with the situation that good faith has finally evaporated? Can y'all stash it in some secret admin-only place? But how to explain to non-admins? Katr67 (talk) 16:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:DENY is fine in many cases, perhaps more than half of them. However, PCH has seen plenty of our reactions, so removing the LTA entry probably isn't going to do much. On the other hand, if the settings are left as they are, there's little he can do now, so maybe erasing the whole thing isn't a bad idea. Hmmmm.... So far, there might have been as many as one AGF editor who didn't turn out to be a PCH sock, so it turns out there's little need to explain it to anyone. —EncMstr (talk) 17:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

There needs to be a way for admins to retain this information in such a way that it can only be seen by admins (and maybe rollbackers - hint, hint), so as not to re-invent the wheel; but to not be seen by the general public, i.e. by the troll himself so that he won't derive any further ego-boost from it. Meanwhile, I see that PCH is branching out to anything that remotely sounds like "Pioneer Courthouse", so that he can try to slip his stupid comment in. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 17:27, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I understand admin-only, and those kinds of things, but the real problem isn't the AGF editors who want to edit the page, it's the editors who take the sock comments at face value (i.e., AGF). There's always going to be a new editor who doesn't understand the saga- such is life with socks, especially long-term socks.

So I'm saying it's necessary for average editors to be able to see the LTA page. Sure, it's a shrine and all of that, but .. so? It allows us to expend less effort to explain and block the PCH sock than it does for the sock to do their work. tedder (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay. Never mind then. Now per WP:DENY, let's wrap this up too... Wknight94 ^talk 18:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

The average editor is not in position to block them. I don't have any problems with average editors. The problems I have are with some AIV admins, when you post that so-and-so is a sock of such-and-such, and they know nothing about the case, and of course they don't believe you, and they tell you to take it to SPI, not knowing that it's already been SPI'd ad nauseum. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

← Hi folks - friendly TPS dropping by and all. Just a few thoughts from someone who doesn't know one of these guys unless it comes up and kicks him in shin with its quacky webbed feet. The whole thing just seems a bit "beansy and all to me. OTOH, there's a real good point about being able to point to an info page pretty quickly to get someone up to speed. My idea would be to turn the page into a redirect. Redirect it to WP:SOCK, WP:LTA, WP:DENY ... whatever. The point being that those experienced in these cases will know how to quickly provide a "permalink" to a previous version of the redirect to someone who needs to get up to speed in a hurry. Those curious passerbys are just gonna get an essay, or guideline and kind of shrug it off. It doesn't leave out the rollbackers, it's not readily viewable either. Just a thought. — Ched :  ?  18:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

good idea, Ched. tedder (talk) 18:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Ibrahim Index of African Governance

Hi Tedder, The other day I removed the issues that you had highlighted with the Ibrahim Index of African Governance page after making some edits, and you put them immediately back. I understand why you did so, as certainly I hadn't fully addressed all the concerns, so I don't at all take issue with your action there. I would, however, like to argue a discuss of the points if I may. I am a new user so I apologise if I am wasting your time at all.

Firstly, you've said it needs more third-party sources or references. It already has 7 third party sources - how many more does it need to be sufficient?

Secondly, the notability - the Ibrahim Index is a very prominent measure of African governance, even though it is new - as demonstrated by the external links on the bottom of the page. There are plenty more references available, if necessary. Please let me know if adding more external references would solve the problem.

Thirdly, the fact that it is written like an advertisement - I've tried to clean it up a bit, but I find it quite difficult because I am very favourably disposed towards to the initiative! Any assistance in the regard would be much appreciated.

Thanks! MaritzburgUtd (talk) 17:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

list of best selling artists

It appears the main player in the 92 IP sock farm is back on the talk page again. He just edited within the last hour. Again saying the same stuff that the IP was saying. I don't know what to do about him. Momo san ^Gespräch 20:00, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

It's such a messy thing. Do you mind taking it to ANI? I assume there are other admins who have a better idea of how to handle it than I do. Give me the link, I'll monitor and contribute. tedder (talk) 20:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

It starts about here Talk:List_of_best-selling_music_artists#Simply_wow and going down. Momo san ^Gespräch 20:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry- I meant a link to the ANI thread I'm hoping you'll create. I'm following the article talk already. tedder (talk) 20:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. I'll have the link as soon as it's done. Momo san ^Gespräch 20:08, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, the ANI report is made, it's here. Momo san ^Gespräch 20:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Have a great trip!

I'll expect nothing but the finest upon your return :) -Pete (talk) 17:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Have fun! We here in Idaho's Portugal can't wait to see the photos. Katr67 (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, both of you :-) I don't actually leave 'till Monday, but I'm really busy until then too. I'll touch in occasionally. tedder (talk) 04:33, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Outstanding videos about North Korea

A few days ago I added link to outstanding video about North Korea:

• Inside North Korea (47 min. video)

The link dissapeared. Today I restored the link and added another link:

• Children of the Secret State (45 min. video)

Both links disappeared. Quinacrine (talk) 01:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Tedder, there's a thread open at Talk:North Korea#Outstanding videos about North Korea about this. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 01:44, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Replied, edited the page slightly. Unprot/prot requests (and any other help) will need to be done elsewhere, since I won't be around enough for the next 1.5 months. tedder (talk) 03:06, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Chronic fatigue syndrome

I have removed the protection from the page after a request at WP:RFPP referencing a discussion on the talkpage. It seems there is agreement that the editing wasn't disruptive and hopefully the article can move forward. Hope you enjoy your trip, regards, Woody (talk) 08:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

the disney protects

Thx for doing that. Regarding your comment of Make sure to file a sockpuppet report for the socks, we have. The most recent one was rejected with the followup suggestion of protection the pages again. We're maintaining a list of related vandal edits here, so you can see some of the history and IP address range. SpikeJones (talk) 04:04, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Sweet- glad you've filed and are tracking it. I've been through the WP:LTA thing too- see Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Pioneercourthouse.. keep the vandallog up, warn all IPs and users, and report them as soon as they cross the bar. It's harder if it isn't obvious vandalism, and it's also harder when a sockpuppet investigation hasn't been completed. Once the latter occurs, it's easier to block them on the first hint of "jump in dot". I'd be happy to help out with page protection as necessary. tedder (talk) 04:14, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Advice always appreciated from those who've been there before. Will keep you posted, but usually the page prots seems to keep things at bay. We'll see. Thx again. SpikeJones (talk) 04:22, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. The one thing I forgot- know that it's a game of whack-a-mole, and it should take less work for "us" than for the sock. So keep your vandal report up to date, and don't burn yourself out. tedder (talk) 04:28, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

And they've hit again, from yet another IP in the range. This is fun, yes? SpikeJones (talk) 12:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

page protection requested.... and denied. Jah jah jah. SpikeJones (talk) 13:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I see why it was denied- not much activity. Until a SPI is approved and everything is linked, it's hard to protect a bunch of pages. tedder (talk) 16:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Anon IP edits started up again, hitting other pages. (83.70.162.93). Same 83.70.x.x address as others and same page destinations. Suggestions on where/how to proceed for next steps? SpikeJones (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

List of best-selling music artists

The semi-protection that was supposed to re-apply after the expiration of the full protection (as you state in this edit) never got re-applied, could you please restore it as this page is a target for vandals. Thanks.--Harout72 (talk) 19:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, a request has already been made to re-apply the full protection before there is consensus. Probably the best for now.--Harout72 (talk) 19:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Get well soon

Hope you are feeling better after the crash. Hopefully no long term impact. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:32, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, AM. I'm a wee bit sore, and the head injury just means I have to be extra-careful for the next little while. tedder (talk) 06:51, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Glad to see you back editing already. Sorry about your head bonk. That's some brag-worthy road rash though! BTW, tell T we need her on Wikipedia--she's got a good head on her shoulders! Katr67 (talk) 22:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Katr :-) Mrs Tedder edits here once a month or so- she's certainly smart. FWIW, my score on the Glasgow Coma Scale was a 6. Good times. tedder (talk) 05:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Question?

On "Talk" page of Kiha Software... you wrote "No prejudice against recreation as a neutral article". Could you explain what your wording means here? I'm happy with the tone of discussion... and the little stub I created doesn't have any bias, as far as I can tell... so I'm a little confused by the statement? I'm also not sure if you meant "re/creation" or recreation (ie. play) ? Just learning Wikipedia.... can you explain? Many thanks. Nedhayes (talk) 00:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nedhayes, what I mean is that it should follow the neutral point of view of all articles on Wikipedia. If you have a conflict of interest with Kiha Software, note it's acceptible on Wikipedia, but should be stated. tedder (talk) 00:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely, I agree with the policy of neutrality. Thus my confusion.... as everything written there was attributed, and purely factual. (ie. Company located in Seattle, stealth mode, that's about it as far as info.... hard to bias 3 sentences) Yes, I have a conflict with the company, as I'm working with / for them... but attempted not to add information that would create bias in any way, and would not be positioned as "advertisement" or "endorsement." Stuck to public facts. Thus, the question on neutrality. Open to suggestions on what would make this info more neutral. Many thanks. Nedhayes (talk) 00:012, 1 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.42.105.97 (talk)

Woops -- somehow I deleted what you wrote.... anyway, I did read it. Thanks for the help. After reading the guidelines, I will be certain to state COI clearly in future. Many thanks. Nedhayes (talk) 00:012, 1 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.42.105.97 (talk)

No problem. Even if it gets deleted, feel free to bring it back when more details can be given. tedder (talk) 05:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Links Glenn Beck

• http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/9gbdj/did_glen_beck_really_rape_and_murder_a_girl_in/
• http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090901181557AAie9Wz
• http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-323336
• http://foxnewsboycott.com/glenn-beck/glenn-beck-raped-and-murdered-a-girl-in-1990/
• http://digg.com/politics/Glenn_Beck_Raped_And_Murdered_A_Girl_In_1990

Basically it got posted on these types of sites today. It was only a few hours ago, so I'm expecting the shit to hit fan hard soon. Soxwon (talk) 02:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Can you post it to WP:ANI and give me that link? tedder (talk) 02:58, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok Soxwon (talk) 02:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Done Soxwon (talk) 03:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Film Series

I saw you declined the protection for the list of... film articles, the IP in question has been adding specualtion to those pages for the last four months under different IP addresses, 86.178.84.117, 86.176.176.90, 86.178.153.2, 86.177.116.92, 86.137.191.17, 86.156.237.148, 86.154.81.24, 86.156.237.24, 86.156.235.250, and I have tried several times to tell them not to add films which have not been released but they refuse to discuss anything. The most recent edits include moving the Saw series from six films to seven, even though the sixth film has yet to be released. That is one small example of the hundreds of edits that they have made. I have all the film series on my watchlist but removed them because the constant additions became frustrating and this one editor's lack of communication compounded it. I have tried for community consensus, at the Film Wikiproject (to define what films should be listed) and even attempted to have the pages deleted. I don't want to have to go to RFPP but the current state of the IP adding films for the year 2011, and other editors reverting is not doing anyone any favours. Darrenhusted (talk) 10:34, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Great to meet you!

Tedder, it was great to finally meet you in person at Portland WikiWednesday! Pete (talk) 13:38, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, nice to meet you too Pete :-) tedder (talk) 15:19, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Dalton Highway

For some reason you seem to think that my citation was a spam link. While it does have a motel listing at the top, the page linked to contains basically known information about the area, including that the road is 414 miles long and the page itself is not selling any services as it is a local website containing information. If you feel there is a better page stating this fact, please remove my citation and link to a better page, rather than remove it all together and put citation needed. Right now I put in another citation that is very agreeable, that comes from the US Department of Interior Land Management.

http://www.blm.gov/ak/st/en/prog/recreation/dalton_hwy.html

--24.184.36.134 (talk) 21:53, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

No matter what, your site is not a reliable source. Please read WP:RS and WP:V to see what a reliable source would consist of. For instance, to verify the length of the highway, a government site would be sufficient. tedder (talk) 22:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The second citation is perfect- thanks. tedder (talk) 22:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Mr Smith Takes a Short Trip to Tokyo

I am not sure how to approach you so I am writing this here. I see that you have deleted the description of the documentary film Mr Smith Takes a Short Trip to Tokyo... But as far as I can see it was a documentary [7] [8] [9] and I was using the wiki page as a very good reference guide to modern architecture in Tokyo, which does not exist elsewhere. I cannot understand why you deleted something that obviously adds to the sum of human knowledge and was verifiable... Perhaps you don't like architecture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.205.148 (talk) 08:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi- this was deleted per consensus of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr Smith Goes to Tokyo. One of Wikipedia's 5 pillars is verifiability; the information should exist outside on reliable sources outside Wikipedia. If it does, and you can meet the requirements for a new page on Wikipedia, feel free to recreate. tedder (talk) 11:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Pioneer...

...has really gone bananas today. But he's right, his original talk page is blocked. Maybe open that page up and let him speak out (assuming good faith where there is none, I realize...) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:10, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Done, assuming User:Pioneercourthouse is his original talk page, of course. It isn't like there are no other avenues of discussion open to him. Nice job, BTW, on replying to the 'source'. tedder (talk) 12:13, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Quick Question

Hi there, if you dont mind answering, how do you get modules to put on your user page? Thanks JocobFTB2 (talk) 18:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I think you are talking about the userboxes. See Wikipedia:Userboxes/Gallery. tedder (talk) 18:23, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Eugene, Oregon

Hello? Are you from Eugene? I went to Willamette HS.--TParis00ap (talk) 22:10, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

So, do you say, "It's Willamette, you bet!" or do you say, "It's Willamette, dammet!" :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 22:12, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

You? Gene? No, I've never lived in Eugene, just poking along with high school articles. tedder (talk) 22:14, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I say "Willamette, it sucksette." :D. Ok, I saw that school, which I've never heard of after growing up in Eugene and only leaving 5 years ago, and I thought you may be from the area. Ohh well. Happy editting.--TParis00ap (talk) 22:16, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I've been living at the north end of the Willamette River for a few years now (previously: SEA, SAN, etc). I'm just trying to fill out the redlinks at List of high schools in Oregon and User:Tedder/2008 Oregon high school graduation rates. tedder (talk) 22:18, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

So how do you say it? :) And what do you call citizens of that fair-to-middlin' city: Eugenics? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 22:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Rhymes with "dammit". The real question, what's the Pioneer Courthouse of Eugene? tedder (talk) 22:20, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

You mean, where do all the homeless hang out? Springfield. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 22:22, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Eugenians, "Hey hippie"... I had a home in Springfield once. I didn't commit any felonious acts though, so I guess I'm mostly harmless. It's pretty much illegal to be homeless in Eugene these days, but there's always my old 'hood. I had a home there too. And again, no murders. Katr67 (talk) 03:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

National Film Awards

Actually, I looked at the history, and it looked like Tomjacobm (talk · contribs) was logging out and editing as an IP to evade being blocked for edit-warring. I blocked them both--the IP for 31 hours and Tomjacobm for 48 hours. Blueboy96 01:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for digging (futher) to catch that. tedder (talk) 01:05, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Lincoln

Can you give me a hand over at Talk:Lincoln on the basics of a DAB page? Erector Euphonious (talk) 14:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a dab expert, and it looks like there are enough eyeballs on it. tedder (talk) 14:05, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Mr Smith Goes to Tokyo

You deleted a wikipage on Japanese Architecture and then you deleted my question as to why you deleted it, without giving a reason to either. I am confused. Are you allowed to do this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Architectlover (talk • contribs) 15:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr Smith Goes to Tokyo for why it was deleted. tedder (talk) 15:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Protection of Pittsburgh Pirates

I understand wanting to protect against vandalism, but I don't see any vandalism or edits against consensus. All I see is one slightly rude IP editor who was understandably angry that his correct edits were being reverted. Could you please point the "vandalism, edits against consensus" to me? (I'm sorry if I come off rude, I'm trying to multi-task right now, I don't mean it.) BAPACop (converse) 00:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi BAPA, by "edits against consensus" I meant there was some edit warring going on. It seemed like a lot of this happening- like some IPs were being directed at the article. It's not a big issue- your edits look just fine, and I was responding to a request at WP:RFPP. tedder (talk) 01:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for answering quickly! I guess I actually forgot about the edits like that occurring earlier. Sorry for bothering you. BAPACop (converse) 01:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. There were a few smelly events too- like this edit summary and this math issue you corrected. No worries- I'm just here to help. tedder (talk) 01:50, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Shirelive Church

You declined my request for unprotection, can you please give me some tips to get the article up to scrach Bunzyfunzy (talk) Bunzyfunzy (talk) 07:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi- have you seen Wikipedia:Your first article? tedder (talk) 09:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Katherine Knight

Dear Tedder, thanks for the effort on requests for protection, however it haas taken me hours to even get this far. I request you take over the reversion. MartinSFSA (talk) 10:15, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

75.47.153.191

What would you do about this? Obviously the same editor that you have recently blocked, but we don't want to start playing a game with him/her. I actually think the IP was trying to be helpful (the image had already been declined by an IfU reviewer) although obviously edit warring is unacceptable. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:32, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Oooh, a kitty!

TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Thanks for protecting List of DirecTV channels but I never said I owned it, I'm just trying to stop disruptive IP vandals. TomCat4680 (talk) 22:43, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Sibel_Edmonds

1. thanks for looking at the Sibel Edmonds article and questioning the decision to block. Did you have knowledge beyond his work in the article of "conflict of interest" that you mentioned?
2. OCPD is handy for a programmer, except for Is unable to discard worthless objects ( Martin | talk • contribs 20:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC))

Couple things- first, new sections are usually added by the tab bar at the top. There's a "new section" tab, which lets the edit summary not reflect the previous section.

Second, as I implied on the unprotection, I'm not really forming an opinion about the sources or the users. I hope you can reach a consensus on your own.

OCPD- look! a shiny object! :-) tedder (talk) 21:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Sock Puppet

Hi Tedder, I hope you don't mind me contacting you.

Whilst I was working my way through my watchlist of pages tonight, I think I may have stumbled across the works of a sock puppet. The reason I think this is because for the EastEnders characters pages I watch (like the Lauren Crace one that I reported for protection) the edits are virtually the same, the IP address is listed to the same provider but the IPs are different each time. I investigated the IP provider (ripe network coordination centre) and from what I can find out this is possible. I'm starting to think that the person is simply changing their IP every now and then to carry on making disruptive edits?

I will now be keeping an eye on all the EastEnders cast wikis for this persons disruptive edits.

Anyway I'm just looking for your advice on the best way to handle this. If I do get any more evidence of sock puppet work I intend to report the IPs. What's the best way to report it? --5 albert square (talk) 22:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi 5A, I don't mind. I'll give you some basics:

• Create a page (such as User:5 albert square/EastEnders sockpuppet log), track the diffs, dates, and IPs that are being used. If the sockpuppet uses username(s), pay special attention to those. Also create an introduction, explaining the modus operandi of the sockpuppet (with diffs); this is useful for directing curious editors to.
• Use very little energy to revert sockpuppetry/vandalism (see WP:RBI), but make sure to tag your edit summaries with "sock" in some way, so other editors know why you aren't doing much. The goal is to expend less energy than the sockpuppet.
• If the behavior is egregious, severe, or settles on one IP, be prepared to file a sockpuppet investigation for it. This is a good time to checkuser for more usernames (if there are any).
• Don't be discouraged. Using Twinkle and rollback, you can spend little effort or frustration to revert the sockpuppet edits.
• Come back here if there's something specific I can do.

Hope this helps. tedder (talk) 23:49, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tedders

Thanks for the advice. I have now set up a Sock Puppet log for all Wikis related to Neighbours and EastEnders as it is those Wikis that have caused me concern recently. I've set up the log here [[10]]. Is there anything that you would suggest adding or changing in it?

Also can I ask what you mean by Twinkle and rollback?

Once again thanks for the advice! --5 albert square (talk) 01:34, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi- thanks for the log. It looks like a good start. Make sure to get diffs of the "evil" the sock has done. See WP:DIFF if you need help with that.

Twinkle and rollback: WP:TWINKLE, WP:ROLLBACK. It makes undoing changes easier. Keep asking questions! tedder (talk) 05:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Make sure to let WP:EE know about it (on their talk page). In fact, you should be active in that group (not sure if you are or not). WikiProjects are where the "community" of Wikipedia is really at. tedder (talk) 05:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi again Tedders, I am already a member of WP:EE but have added this to their talkpage. Now just to see if Neighbours have a similar thing to this :). Thanks again for the advice :) --5 albert square (talk) 21:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Jim Hawkins

The page has been unprotected. Is this correct? Mjroots (talk) 05:55, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, look at that. How crazy has that page been? Anyhow, it is only semi-protected- the diff only shows the protection "sticker" being removed, the semi-protection remains. Removing it is a fairly goodfaith thing. I may comment on the AFD, though. tedder (talk) 06:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, just the notice removed then. Thanks for that. Mjroots (talk) 06:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Would you consider extending the semi-protection to run until the AfD debate is over. I know there have been issues with IP vandalism to the article in the past (à la Ken Bruce) so this action would keep the article stable while the debate is going on. I've a feeling this could be quite and AfD discussion. Also, see WP:VPP where I have raised the issue of the right not to have an article about oneself. Mjroots (talk) 08:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that AFD has .. flourished .. overnight. I'll extend the semi-protection, but I'd prefer to let it lapse to prove there are issues with editing it. tedder (talk) 16:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Take care

In Template:World Wrestling Entertainment employees you should have taken into account the warnings on Template:Pp-template about noinclude tags. We had 50 articles in Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. Good luck, Debresser (talk) 14:56, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Since you're obviously an admin, could you null-edit Template:ISO 639 name cel for me, please? It is stuck in that same category for the second day now. Debresser (talk) 14:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. Thanks for the admonishment about the pp template.

I'm not sure the ISO 639 thing is the same. It says "pictish", then everything else (including pp-template) is noincluded. So the pp-template is inside the noinclude. Let me know. tedder (talk) 16:17, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

EdNerd

Obviously a sock. Removing his junk on the talk page was a good idea. Dougweller (talk) 19:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Sock, troll, et cetera. Did you see the stuff on his talk page? Such as the threats? *laughs* tedder (talk) 19:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, this is going to cost Wikipedia huge amounts of money. Maybe we'd better put 'JC invented the Caesar salad' in the lead? Dougweller (talk) 20:20, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll start warming up the Ceasar Salad Controversy of 2009 article now. tedder (talk) 20:24, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Action theory

Having moved the article from "Action theory" to Action theory (philosophy), don't forget to sort out all the links to it, which now point to the disambiguation page at Action theory. It's your responsbility, as the editor who's moved the page. PamD (talk) 22:02, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

You might want to let Tomsega (talk · contribs) know; he was working on it, he'd moved the page (poorly), so I simply reverted his copy-and-paste and did it correctly. He's been working on the rest of the bits behind the move too. tedder (talk) 23:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Soviet war in Afghanistan

You protected this page in its current form.[11] See Talk:Soviet war in Afghanistan#Substandard English in lead.24.22.141.252 (talk) 01:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done Asked for clarification at that talk page, I'll be watching it for your reply. tedder (talk) 03:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Schools

Ha! You beat me to it! Anyway, disregard the part that's now irrelevant:

Don't know if you've seen this?: Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/High schools I just updated our completion rate, so we're winning! :) Hardly anybody updates that page, but still...besides which, we've added far more schools than the initial 247. You might want to save that diff for making redirs one of these days if you're desperate for something to do. Katr67 (talk) 06:30, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Just saw it, of course :-) (stalking your contribs, actually). Added it to my list of TODO. Sweet. tedder (talk) 06:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Tedder (machine)

After a bit of expansion, you're now nominated for DYK. If you got a minute, go over it and tweak or whatever; an extra pair of eyes is always welcome. I'd love to include an image or two from those 19th century books, but I haven't the foggiest how that might work. Do you have any suggestions? Thanks! Drmies (talk) 04:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Sweeeeeet. Nice work, Drmies. I'll ask a wpfriend about the photos- fair use/PD is certainly not my specialty. tedder (talk) 05:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Any photo you find that was published before 1923 is public domain in the U.S. (where it counts). Also, any photo whose creator died over 70 years ago (even if it was never published). Lots of stuff that was published after 1923 is expired copyright, but figuring out whether or not the copyright was renewed is kinda dicey. Aboutmovies is pretty well versed in that stuff, I think. Good luck, and boy I bet you're glad your name isn't Windrowner! -Pete (talk) 05:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Do you do contract work? I have an alternate account that wants an article in its name, too :) decltype (talk) 06:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, if it's not, say, feces-related. Bacon-related stuff I do for free; anything else will require lubrication and aeration (in the form of malt whiskey and cigars). Non-profits pay double. What's the alternate account? Thanks to all of you for the advice--I found one old image in Commons last night, so I think I'm good. Drmies (talk) 14:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

The account name is auto, and the article would be auto (C++). The article would be similar to decltype, but a bit more comprehensive (it has a longer history). While you seem capable of writing about almost anything under the sun, I would be very impressed if you could pull this off. I suppose I'll have to write it myself, when inspiration strikes me. Regards, decltype (talk) 08:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Whoa Decltype--that is SO over my head all I can see is vapor trails...I'm on it, but don't hold your breath, it's a steep learning curve for me. On the bright side, woohoo! Tedder is on the FRONTPAGE right now--Tedder, I think this will kick you right up into bureaucratship. Drmies (talk) 01:37, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Comment at RFPP

I really don't appreciate your comment that I "intended to ignore all rules" when I protected the naming conflict page. I stated that I intended to protect the "wrong version" because that's what we do any time we protect a page under dispute. Bad joke, I guess, but I certainly don't have a bias in the matter. I never take admin action when I am involved in something or have an opinion on it. The belligerents in this conflict, which has encompassed Wikipedia:Naming conflict, Wikipedia:Naming conventions, Catholic Church, and who knows what else for weeks, are quick to cry foul and this was no exception. Please don't cast aspersions at the admin who is willing to act on a difficult page. --Andy Walsh (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Laser brain, my comment about IAR was definitely not meant to be taken in a negative way. I was trying to say "yes, LB probably knows about the guidelines related to page protection and made a concious decision to do it the way he did", not "LB is causing trouble". Okay? I'm sorry that you misconstrued it otherwise, and that it (obviously) could be misconstrued by others in that manner too. I certainly wasn't trying to belittle you or cast aspersions, I swear. Cheers, tedder (talk) 16:54, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, no biggie. Thanks for the reply. Look who's quick to cry foul now. :) --Andy Walsh (talk) 17:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. It's all good! tedder (talk) 00:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK nom

Yes, you pretty much sit back and do nothing at this point. At some point someone will come along a review the hook and the article to make sure it passes all the rules. They will then leave a symbol like the one already there and notes. If it is a check mark, then you need not do anything. If it is anything else, then address whatever problem the editor points out. Note, this process might be done in a day, or in a week, so you just need to check back every day to keep an eye on it. Good editors at DYK will let you know if there is a problem, but there is high turnover and newer folks may not now to do this. If you go there and the hook is gone, check the queue for it (link is in the nav template at the top right), as that means it will be on the main page in the next day or so. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

David Leslie Hawksworth

Hello. I noticed that you rejected the nomination for deletion of David Leslie Hawksworth's article. I understand there was some kind of form mistake. Could you explain me what happened? Cheers --Karljoos (talk) 16:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Karljoos, when you created the AFD, you didn't follow the steps at WP:AFD. Specifically, the discussion page was neither created nor transcluded. In other words, you followed step 1, but not steps 2 and 3. Cheers, tedder (talk) 16:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

LHS

Thanks for noticing!! I was using Huggle to revert vandalism, (boy, is that an experience, I usually get my user page vandalised in retaliation) and unfortunately, the LHS page had some pretty nasty npov comments on it. Another editor started the rehab and I just tried to add what I could to the page. I'm not from there either, but it needed to be done! --Funandtrvl (talk) 16:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

For that... why do the links sometimes have a .2b or something similar (and why do they eventually get broken if I use them)?  7  05:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

2b is a "plus", like this: +

That means that if it's in the section header, it'll get translated to that. In any case, I think the difference was that the section header changed, which means the URL got changed. tedder (talk) 05:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

BTW, those had 28 and 29 in them, which is open and close parenthesis. I'm such a nerd, I had to go check. tedder (talk) 05:28, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm usually a geek myself - just wasn't expecting ascii codes without a percent or something.  7  07:03, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Autoblocks

Hey, just a quick note regarding that mix-up with Sesu Prime (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Looks like the user was unfortunately hit with an autoblock, even though you unblocked their account. A number of automated tools exist to help find autoblocks, but over time I've found Special:BlockList to be the most reliable. Unfortunately, removing a direct block does not remove any associated autoblocks. Anyway, just a note for future reference. Cheers, – Luna Santin (talk) 19:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Luna, thanks for fixing it, and thanks for following up with me. Hopefully I'll have learned my lesson, eh? tedder (talk) 05:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully! :) In my experience, autoblocks are probably one of the most voodoo-based aspects of adminly stuff. You're certainly not the first to run into that particular issue. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:38, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Jack Sheppard

Please don't just undo my edits.

The novel Jack Sheppard is about Jack Sheppard. Indeed, it is one of the principal works about him (if liberally fictionalised, in Victorian melodramatic fashion). It makes perfect sense to include it in the hatnote - much more so than those other people already mentioned there. Perhaps it should be in the disambiguation page too.

If you think mentioning the novel once in the lede, once in an image caption and once in the main body of the article is overlinking, then remove one or two of them, not all three. -- Hyphen8d (talk) 20:00, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

About undoing your edits, see WP:OWN.

The issue was that you linked to it four times- once in the dab, three times in the body. Two links in the body (one in the lede, one in the main) would be understandable. Having an endlessly long dab is counterproductive to the dab page. tedder (talk) 20:03, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Adding links to a related page is somehow WP:OWNing the artice? Good grief. I could retort that you should not WP:OWN your "undo" action, but I would not be so crass.

I added one link in the hatnote, one in the lede, one in the image caption and one in the main body of the article. [12] Feel free to remove the ones you think are irrelevant, but don't blindly remove all of them, please. -- Hyphen8d (talk) 20:10, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, whatever. Have it your own way. I mean, it is not as if anyone would want to read about a novel published in the same journal as Oliver Twist anyway. -- Hyphen8d (talk) 20:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Random

I just want to say the personal attacks on your user page made my night. <tommy> (talk) 02:00, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad :-) Cheers, tedder (talk) 02:29, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

PS I like Adam Corolla too... especially the one youtube video clip where he disses that nutbag Ann Coulter!!! oh gosh =) <tommy> (talk) 11:48, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Unprotection of Template:Infobox Russian inhabited locality

Hey, sorry to step on your toes, but I don't think the project should wait for an admin to come back to decide whether to unprotect a page. I've taken action on Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#.7B.7Blt.7CInfobox_Russian_inhabited_locality.7D.7D. The protection action was obviously not a good idea for User:Ezhiki to take and an ANI thread has been opened at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Breakdown_at_Template:Infobox_Russian_inhabited_locality. BTW, I disagree with your comment on the template talk that unprotection would be wheel warring. Wheel warring is specifically defined as re-doing a reversion by another admin. Unprotection constitutes the reversion, re-protection would be wheel warring.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 19:47, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Toe-stepping is fine- thanks for stepping up and dealing with it. I would have preferred to wait until Ezhiki was back online, but I'm happy to let a confident mop-wielder come in and deal with it. Cheers, tedder (talk) 19:49, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, good. I've never run into Ezhiki before, so if you are familiar with him or her it might be productive for you to stay involved. I've done a lot of DR but I'm probably as hard-core as you can get about not using the tools for your own benefit (I've wasted my time a couple times arguing with other admins about protecting their own user pages and I still consider it the appearance of abuse at best) and I probably won't give Ezhiki a lot of slack (read "I'm already assuming bad faith by this point"). I probably wouldn't be the best to try to work things out.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 20:28, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I've never run across Ezhiki before- I just saw the message about being gone for the weekend. No worries, let me know if the issue gains traction and I appear to have not noticed it. tedder (talk) 20:32, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

The Circus Starring: Britney Spears

I created the archive page. However, this is the first time I have ever done one. Could you check to make sure everything looks right? ---Shadow (talk) 02:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks fine- the {{talkheader}} takes care of archiving, so I removed the link. There are lots of ways to do it- I usually use an autoarchiver because I'm lazy :-) tedder (talk) 03:42, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I see who finally got tired of always having to protect that page. :) Thank you so much for keeping the IP's away for a while. Hopefully after the tour wraps up in November things will settle down. ---Shadow (talk) 04:20, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully it'll work, eh? I didn't know that's when the tour wrapped, but I didn't even read the article (or look at the pictures). tedder (talk) 04:23, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: my talk page

Your welcome. Please note that I wasn't the IP who started the edit war with the user. In fact, I took the dispute to the talk page in the first place. The reason i didn't create an account cause i do not want people to go against me for a while. Regards! 74.183.173.237 (talk) 04:00, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I know there's more than you (i.e., the other IP). No worries, I'm just always curious when someone doesn't create an account. Keep up the good work. tedder (talk) 04:02, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering if you protected the American Airlines page if you could help settle this dispute. If you can't, that's okay. 74.183.173.237 (talk) 04:05, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I can't. I'm clueless on airports and terminology like that- I'm hoping someone at WP:AVIA or WP:AIRPORT can help out- if you haven't, post there. tedder (talk) 04:08, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	I've seen your hard work. You seem to be popping up everywhere. Don't think it goes unnoticed or unwelcomed, it's most welcome. You're doing a great job. :) Steve Crossin The clock is ticking.... 06:52, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Aw, thanks. What'd you cross paths with me on? RFPP work? I'm just happy whenever a talk page notification isn't because I've messed something up :-) tedder (talk) 06:53, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

RFPP work, but you also deleted an article I put into CSD. You seem to be doing the work of 5 admins... Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 06:55, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Heh, thanks. I got distracted when I was looking at a backlog and stumbled upon the CSDs. tedder (talk) 06:56, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for User:A234atA234Workshop

An editor has asked for a deletion review of User:A234atA234Workshop. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Jimmy Xu (talk) 07:23, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Dealt with. tedder (talk) 11:52, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Fightstar

So you decided to lock a page in it's "bad sources" format? Nice one. At least remove alternative metal again, because anyone can see the sources given for it are rubbish. The answer is not to lock the page like that, the answer is to block the editor who keeps on adding them and won't listen to reason (possibly because he can't even understand English). 86.129.209.154 (talk) 08:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Can you give me a link to the "good" version? It's also only semi-protected, so any logged-in user can change it. tedder (talk) 11:53, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi "86", we have a humorous essay about this--see WP:WRONGVERSION. Katr67 (talk) 19:14, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

thetextpage

You have marked my article as written like an advert. Can you please give me some feedback as to how I can correct this? Thanks Lcardiff (talk) 10:45, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi- are you involved with thetextpage? If so, it'll probably be hard. Otherwise, the best thing to do is to read WP:NPOV. tedder (talk) 11:55, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tedder, thanks for the reply. I am not involved with thetextpage but have been following it's progress and researched to produce the article. I have never actually written an article on here but am a huge fan of wikipedia and after finding thetextpage didn't have a page I thought I'd submit one. I used another wiki page as a guidline - themilliondollarhomepage, which is a similar concept. Can you give me some examples of where in the article it sounds like an advert? Should I add more references?

thanks for your time,

Lcardiff (talk) 07:49, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Deletion without proper warning or cause

You recently deleted Simpedia. You neither gave any warning to its creator nor put it on the list of articles proposed for deletion. Please revert your deletion and place the proper template on the page and make the proper article in the afforementioned page. — Supuhstar * § 17:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Supuhstar, I deleted it under the speedy deletion tag, which it had been listed at by another editor. Specifically, the other editor had marked it under A7, meaning there was no indications of notability, and I agreed. There's no requirement that articles go through the WP:AFD process, especially if they are fairly clear examples. No sources were given, nor did it appear to meet Wikipedia:Notability (web).

I would suggest that you have the page userified (I'd be happy to do that), and then work on it in your own space. When the article meets all of Wikipedia's guidelines, it can be moved over. I'd be happy to userify the article for you if you wish; otherwise, feel free to list it at WP:DRV and then notify me. tedder (talk) 05:38, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Oregon Connections Academy

On September 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Oregon Connections Academy, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Infobox Russian inhabited locality

Hi there! As the matter has been escalated to AN/I, I direct your attention there. I have provided an extensive description of what has happened (and why certain things were said and done), and I trust it should take care of your original inquiry as well. If anything is unclear, you are welcome to follow-up with me (either at AN/I or on my talk page). Thanks much for your time anyway!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:56, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw it over there (too). I have no real worries- I tried to give you AGF since you were gone for the weekend, and I'm really only interested in it for the (un)protection aspect. Thanks for your explanation and such. tedder (talk) 19:00, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

OHQ

Unfortunately, I only have OHQ's back as far as 1961. But I'll bet that spot down the street from you could help.... -Pete (talk) 05:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, they could. It's just such a long ways! tedder (talk) 05:49, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Stewie Griffin

Sorry, did not mean to step on your toes about the Stewie Griffin protection issue. I had spent some minutes studying the issue before protecting the article, during which time I guess you had already declined. I was also going to leave edit warring reminders for the two users in question, but you beat me to the punch there. Sorry for any duplication of effort on my part, and thank you for the polite note on RFPP. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 01:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Are we thinking on similar wavelengths again?!? — Kralizec! (talk) 01:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, we're trading messages again :-) No worries, protecting it is perfectly fine, of course. tedder (talk) 01:40, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Revisions to "Charles Karel Bouley"

Dear Tedder. Thank you for your interest.

Although not of her stature, would Cher's name be replaced with Sarkisian?? Charles Karel Bouley is commonly known as "Karel" and only uses his full name when writing i.e. Advocate and Huffington Post.

"The Daily Breeze" is a perfectly valid source, as a well know and widely circulated newspaper in Southern California and is a perfectly valid source. Just because something is printed in Variety, does not mean it is accurate.

Trying to sort through all the "Instructions" in Wikipedia has seemingly exacerbated my dyslexia. Like you , I prefer plain English. I managed to graduate college with several degrees some time ago so I am hoping with assistance to get through this war of semantics and person attacks, not by you!

Your Hall Of Shame is very pointed and borderine hysterical. It shows your sense of humor and humanity. THAT is the person I am addressing! Although i NEVER want to end up there!! Sincerely JoyDiamond (talk) 23:46, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment on the Hall of Shame. However, please take this to Talk:Charles Karel Bouley. That's where editors who are interested in the article can handle it. Regarding Karel versus Bouley, that is handled in WP:SURNAME, which says to use the surname (Bouley) in almost all instances. If something other than that is to be used, it would only happen after consensus on the article talk page. tedder (talk) 03:09, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Nightwish

Really dude I'm going to take what Chad Bowar says over allmusic.com any day of the week. MusicMight also is a far better site to use. Stop editing those out. --Epica124 (talk) 04:08, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi "dude", I understand, but I was mostly suspicious of the genre warring. Removing sources on genres makes the article less well-researched, not more. tedder (talk) 04:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

To follow up about Chad Bowar, about.com is not generally considered a reliable source. tedder (talk) 04:13, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

So a site owned and ran by The New York Times Company is no longer a reliable soucre. That's really funny. And well you are at it metal cyrpt was up there a a soucre for power metal only for it to be removed. Musicmight is also a reliable soucre. In fact I was using a number of reliable sources only for you and others to remove them for no reason in favor of just one site. --Epica124 (talk) 14:16, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead and use those others, but about.com is not a reliable source. Again, it's an ad-supported blog. tedder (talk) 14:17, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Onwed and ran by The New York Times Company with editers who over view things before letting them be posted. --Epica124 (talk) 14:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Go to WP:RSN. Do you have a COI with about.com? tedder (talk) 14:30, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

No one can even edit becasue you guys locked it down and took out all the reliabls soucres and use just allmusic.com --Epica124 (talk) 14:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Locked due to edit warring and genre warring. Now, please participate at the article talk page, at WP:RSN, but not here. tedder (talk) 14:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I have and so far I'm the only one putting up any info. I was the one who used metalcrypt only to have it removed in fact I went out and found reliable sources only to have them removed.I wnet out there and got them to stop the editing and then ever one goes into and edit war even though I put up reliable sources. --Epica124 (talk) 14:57, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Youkilis

Many thanks for your help on semiprotecting the pg.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem. Amusingly, I'm the one that protected it last time. BTW, note that not everyone is in the USA or follows baseball- so it'd be better to say "until playoffs are over (October)" :-) tedder (talk) 03:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Good point.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:37, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:

I'm afraid I regard all of the time I've spent arguing with people about musical genre as a colossal waste. I'm sorry, but I will not be able to be of any help in that matter. Chubbles (talk) 06:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I've been realizing that the band pages are simply collecting grounds for fanboys/fangirls too. tedder (talk) 06:36, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I actually find these kind of discussion quite interesting from an epistemological and ontological point of view. I wonder what you find so absurd about them? —Ruud 10:55, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Thomas F. Hamilton

Hi Tedder.

I recently requested a page move that I couldn't do myself, because a redirect was in the way.

You declined this on the grounds "redirects are cheap, see no reason it shouldn't forward as a legitimate typo/search".

I don't mean to be rude, but maybe you should do a little homework first, and not as a reflex decline page moves, at least not on those grounds. Of course redirects work fine, but there should be a reason why pages are stored where they are. For example, we don't have "Eldrick Tont Woods" as an original page name, and "Tiger Woods" as a redirect, although it most certainly would work fine.

So, the question is: How was the man generally known? Was it as "Tom Hamilton", "Thomas F. Hamilton" or "Thomas Foster Hamilton"? The answer to that question is where the page should be stored (including a disambiguator in case 1).

I requested another move the same time as this one, for "Benjamin Delahouf Foulois" to "Benjamin D. Foulois". The admin that fixed that one, instead moved the page to "Benjamin Foulois", without the middle initial. Even better (provided that is how he was known).

Cheers

LarRan (talk) 10:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi LarRan, here's the template you had put in:

{{db-g6|rationale=unless he really was known by both his given names in combination (which the article suggests is not the case, mentioning "Tom Hamilton" as a known-by), this article should be stored as Thomas F. Hamilton, thus a reversal of a redirect}}

Your rationale didn't make it crystal clear that you were going to move Thomas Foster Hamilton to Thomas F. Hamilton. It's a little ambigous because of the awkward wording, and so I (mis)read it as you simply wanted Thomas F. Hamilton deleted because it was an unlikely redirect.

Instead, it would have been clearer to me if you had used {{db-move}}. In fact, if you put it back like that, I'll delete it for you immediately and you can get on with your move. tedder (talk) 11:26, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

MLG Protection/Citations

• Context: Major League Gaming tedder (talk) 02:02, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the much needed protection. I might come back to you if we need help after it is lifted. As you may know, "They'll be back." And if it's not too much to ask, could I have a better view of where citations are needed.

Thanks

James (talk) 9:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Glad to help. Yes, feel free to drop by here, as I protected it last time. If I'm not around or don't respond, you can go to WP:RFPP too. Just make sure to tell me what article you are talking about- I had to look at your contribs to figure it out :-)

Some article tips- these are just from my initial glance.

• I added {{fact}} tags in a few places. Overall it seems cited fairly well (though I didn't read the cites). Some of the {[tl|fact}} tags may seem picky, but they will (in the long run) help deter vandalism and make the article much more solid. LMK if any of them don't make sense, and if they are covered in another ref, just add a named ref and remove the tag.
• Move everything from the "see also" into prose in the article.
• Give citations for each year of the National Championships, not just one cite at the top.
• The "pro circuit" section has one cite. Each paragraph should have a cite, and some even more.
• The lede explains things, but it sort of needs a history and overview (well cited, naturally). As someone who hadn't even heard of MLG, it was pretty good at explaining how it works, but not perfect.

That pretty much does it. Good work. tedder (talk) 02:02, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

thanks for the unprotect on Joe Wilson

Ooh... what is this? I have to figure out this editnotice trick... now I forgot what I was going to say. Oh yeah: thanks for fulfilling my WP:RFP request... I guess I'll just eat the cookie myself then.... -- 209.6.238.201 (talk) 22:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Enjoy the cookie :-) Yes, {{editnotice}} is good, OTOH that page didn't "deserve" to be locked indefinitely. Ah well, thanks for using WP:RFPP. tedder (talk) 01:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Protection on naming conflict

Hi there,

I've left you a note at Wikipedia talk:Naming conflict. I see your note in the edit notice here regarding admin actions, but since I recently unprotected that page, I don't want to override another protection without discussion, despite disagreeing with it. Thanks. :) kmccoy (talk) 07:40, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I gave my rationale over there- thanks for the heads-up. tedder (talk) 10:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Cleveland Show protection

Hello, thank you for approving my requests to protect The Cleveland Show, however, I do not believe that you correctly protected the article, as it was recently vandalized by a random IP user. Thanks for your time. Gage (talk) 10:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

doh, thanks! I probably just forgot to click "submit". It's done now. tedder (talk) 10:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Richard "Dick" Klotzman

Hi. Saw you declined my speedy, which makes sense. Unfortunately, it's a horrid little article, but the guy seems notable. I'm wondering if there's any way I can get someone to fix it and possibly include more information about his tax evasion. I can't find may other sources anyway, since they all seem to be the same section copypasted over and over again, though he does appear in photos with notable people, but those only confirm that he's a Promoter. I couldn't find news sources to confirm anything else... Suggestions? 黒い白い (KuroiShiroi) 15:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I removed the speedy because there are hints of notability. You might take it through WP:AFD if there's no solid proof he is notable.

As far as improvement, the best thing to do is to find a WikiProject that deals with him. For instance, Wikipedia:WikiProject Nevada would be one. tedder (talk) 15:56, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

The article's author indicates that he will try to improve the article, so I will defer judgment for a few days. 黒い白い (KuroiShiroi) 15:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

User:WISE-HR/WISE HR

This page was nominated under CSD G11, which does apply to user pages. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 00:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

You're right. I was thinking it was an 'A' rule. I'll go delete it now. tedder (talk) 00:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

CSD

The G4 tag wasn't invalid here [13]. The General criteria applies to all namespace. see Wikipedia:CSD#General. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 00:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

You're right- see the section above you. I mentally let the "G" rules be lumped in with the "A" rules. Doh. tedder (talk) 00:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Cool, no worries. :-) <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 00:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Photo

Hey was this just out of habit or did you really want a second picture? Aboutmovies (talk) 11:01, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Yep, entirely out of habit. Doh! Fixed it. tedder (talk) 13:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Block of User:Linas

Hello, I saw a thread on WP:WQA regarding this user. I note you blocked this user, but you didn't note the block on the user's talk page. A few editors on WQA were discussing the user without knowing they have been blocked, since there was no template stating such on the user's talk page. Just commenting here to let you know you forgot the template when you blocked Linas. Thanks. The Seeker 4 Talk 17:35, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

TS4, that's my fault, and I'm sorry for not placing the template. I thought it had automagically happened with the block. I should have checked. Placed it now. tedder (talk) 18:50, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

While I do not condone the use of four letter words, it's possible that Linas misunderstood what happened at Trace monoid. Your friend, User:Aboutmovies had just finished editing Beyond Words Publishing, and then he linked it in all articles having a reference that contained "Beyond Words" in it. Accidentally, he also linked it in some Math/Computer Science articles, that were citing a book published by Springer Verlag, but which happened to contain "Beyond Words" in the book's title; one of those article was Trace monoid. So, this was a mistake, not vandalism. I've reverted those edits of Aboutmovies to math articles, and left him a note on his talk page. Later Aboutmovies also tagged Trace monoid as needing inline references; like I explained on my talk page, this was not appropriate, but I would not call this edit of Aboutmovies vandalism either. But it's possible that Linas saw it as WP:POINT or retaliatory, while I prefer to WP:AGF. Pcap ping 22:16, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It's nice to hear some of the context behind it. In any case, Linas was certainly attempting to escalate the situation- responding on his talk page, then responding on Aboutmovies' talk page. Since Aboutmovies had already warned him about WP:NPA, I immediately blocked for the (further) disruption and over-the-top breach of WP:EQ. Linas hasn't asked for the block to be removed on his talk page, so I figure I'll let it stand. tedder (talk) 23:03, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Requests for mediation

A request for formal mediation of the dispute concerning Mediation case name has been filed with the Mediation Committee (MedCom). You have been named as a party in this request. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/User:Linas and then indicate in the "Party agreement" section whether you would agree to participate in the mediation or not.

Mediation is a process where a group of editors in disagreement over matters of article content are guided through discussing the issues of the dispute (and towards developing a resolution) by an uninvolved editor experienced with handling disputes (the mediator). The process is voluntary and is designed for parties who disagree in good faith and who share a common desire to resolve their differences. Further information on the MedCom is at Wikipedia:Mediation Committee; the policy the Committee will work by whilst handling your dispute is at Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Policy; further information on Wikipedia's policy on resolving disagreements is at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes.

If you would be willing to participate in the mediation of this dispute but wish for its scope to be adjusted then you may propose on the case talk page amendments or additions to the list of issues to be mediated. Any queries or concerns that you have may be directed to an active mediator of the Committee or by e-mailing the MedCom's private mailing list (click here for details).

Please indicate on the case page your agreement to participate in the mediation within seven days of the request's submission.

Thank you, linas (talk)

/me goes to get popcorn. This should be interesting. tedder (talk) 23:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

After your rejection for mediation, I have filed a formal complaint with the arbitration committee. I am now asking you to voluntarily relinquish your admin powers, and to voluntarily take an indefinite leave of absence from editing Wikipedia, in recognition for for your actions. I have filed a formal complaint here: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Attack by multiple admins upon User:Linas linas (talk) 02:41, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion. In the spirit of WP:NPANPA and WP:STICK, feel free to pursue it through the formal channels as long as it keeps you entertained and you aren't banned from doing so, but don't post it here on my talk page anymore. Your opinion has certainly been noted. tedder (talk) 02:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/User:Linas. For the Mediation Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite 23:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Article Delete

You deleted this page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viddler, a couple days ago. After submitting a question for some assistance and review, it seems there may have been some confusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk#I.27m_confused_about_something_with_your_article_deletion_policy). Would you please reinstate the article and offer assistance on making NPOV compliant? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.9.12.98 (talk • contribs) 06:47, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi there! Yes, it's possible to restore the page. However, in its current state, it's an advertisement. I can restore it and others may file for deletion, or I can userify it (move it to your account so you can work on it). Which would you like me to do? tedder (talk) 16:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm a little confused, some other admins, wrote the exact opposite of what you are saying. Basically, that the article was not written from a neutral point of view, but was by no means advertising. And if you feel that this article is advertising, how does this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vimeo) not fit the same definition of advertising and not be deleted? They specifically talk about a service and the pricing for the service.

Either way, I was informed that you could assist us in writing a 'netural point of view' article. This is what I would like to do. what is the next step? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.78.113.73 (talk • contribs) 11:49, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Can you link me to the discussion of other admins (or users) talking about the article? The long history of deletions of Viddler certainly says otherwise. In general, I'd point you to WP:CORP and WP:COI, which should help you with guidelines to understand creating an article about a company or product.

As far as Vimeo is concerned, arguing that other stuff exists is not a great strategy- for one, google news has 2200+ articles about vimeo, and only ~270 for viddler. Simply going on page hits isn't sufficient, but as a start, that tells you that comparing Viddler to Vimeo isn't a straight-across comparison.

It's possible for me to userify the article- to put it into your userspace. However, you should create an account here so I can do that (your IP address is changing around on you). If you want the article reinstated on Wikipedia, not just in userspace, you can either recreate it or ask at deletion review. tedder (talk) 19:19, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2009_September_23#I.27m_confused_about_something_with_your_article_deletion_policy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.9.12.98 (talk) 19:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I know, the link was posted already. You haven't given any more rationale for keeping it, nor do you appear to have read and understood Wikipedia's standards I'm not excited about restoring the article without effort being made- you can either create an account and I will userify it for you (move it to your userspace), I'll move it to Articles for Creation if you don't want to create an account, or you can take it to WP:DR. tedder (talk) 21:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)