User talk:OwenX/Archive 12

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

AfD nomination of Louis Cheskin[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, Louis Cheskin, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louis Cheskin. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Eastmain (talk) 21:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand[edit]

Excuse me, but I don't understand why my edit to Graham's Number was considered by you to be vandalism. Everything I put in there was completely correct, and I had no intention to vandalise wikipedia. Plese if you have an issue with my edit talk to me about it, don't just call me a vandal. You might consider to read this Thank You.--58.169.166.143 (talk) 08:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I have made a userspace hopefully now I will be taken more seriously --CallumBrowne (talk) 09:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Please don't waste our time with immature pranks. Your edit was considered vandalism because:
  1. No one claims that Graham's number is "the largest finite number". Everyone with half a brain knows that there is no such number.
  2. You don't need to waste half a page copying the original formula just to show that G+1 > G.
  3. There is no mathematician called Sam Kitchen--either 'English' or Australian, and if there were, he wouldn't be "proving" that you can increase a number by adding one to it, or calling other mathematicians an "immature twat".
Your insistence on adding this piece of nonsense is further proof that you are here to disrupt Wikipedia. If you continue this way, you will be blocked from editing. If you really want to be taken seriously, try editing productively, rather than making up silly hoaxes. Owen× 12:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for User:Losplad[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of User:Losplad. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Apetito[edit]

Hi Owen - would you please userify Apetito to User:SilkTork/Apetito - Apetito are one of the largest suppliers of frozen meals in Europe and are used extensively by social services throughout the UK for their Meals on Wheels service. It's probably just a stump, but there may be a useful starting point there for an article. I intend to write up the article. Regards. SilkTork *YES! 12:35, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. Owen× 12:44, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Super fast! SilkTork *YES! 12:59, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I've today put the article into mainspace. Thanks for your help. SilkTork *YES! 14:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
We should probably merge histories to preserve contribution log per GFDL. I'll go ahead and do it unless you have an objection. Owen× 17:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes - I was going to ask you to do that. Thanks! SilkTork *YES! 17:38, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Would it have been better if I had moved/renamed the page from User:SilkTork/Apetito to Apetito? I've just looked at it and see that there is a history to that one which would have moved over. I hadn't looked at the history previously. SilkTork *YES! 17:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Some material has been lost. The Company InfoBox has gone. Not sure what else. Perhaps it's the stuff I added to the article since it was moved into mainspace? I'll take a closer look. SilkTork *YES! 18:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. That's sorted. I manually inserted the change that occurred just after the history merge, so now all is fine. Phew! SilkTork *YES! 18:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Late Mistake[edit]

Hello OwenX. I am afraid you made a mistake. Today, August 13 2008, I just recieved a message saying that I was blocked for vandalizing pages so you blocked me. That was dated August 20 2007. Why I am getting it now, I don't know, but I am not User:68.210.36.102. Please contact me at User:Steed on the TARDIS wiki. Thank you. -- User:Steed, 13, August 2008 21:40 pm —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Check for yourself and see--you are indeed User:68.210.36.102, as the header clearly shows. The reason you are getting this message now is that you didn't log into your User:Steed account, and no one else has used this IP since I issued that block a year ago. To avoid such problems, you'll need to actually log into your account on this wiki. Use the link at the top right corner for that. Owen× 22:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

re: Rollback[edit]

Thank you! I was planning on inquiring about rollback in the next couple of days as it seems that it'll make reverting vandalism much more efficient. I'll make sure to use it responsibly. Thanks again! Apparition11 (talk) 21:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


Beer in Australia[edit]

Hi Owen - I messed up with the name of the Beer in Australia article. And then when trying to put it right, found that I couldn't. So currently it reads Beer Australia rather than Beer in Australia as it should be. Would you be able to sort that out for me? Cheers SilkTork *YES! 13:47, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

And move Mexican beer to Beer in Mexico. Sorry to be a nuisance. SilkTork *YES! 13:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Done; no nuisance at all! Owen× 19:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
You're a useful man to know! Thanks. SilkTork *YES! 20:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cask Ales.jpg[edit]

Something has happened with this image. The description is wrong, but I can't edit it. It looks like another image with the same name was deleted and somehow the description from the other image has been transposed onto this one. Anything you can do? SilkTork *YES! 00:32, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I think what happened was that an identically named image was uploaded on Commons. You can edit the description there, and load your original image again to Commons under a different name, say, The Percy Arms. If this doesn't work, you might need help from an admin on Commons. Owen× 18:38, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I went into the Commons page and edited that, and then did another upload on Wiki. There is still a lingering bit of text about the Percy Arms image that someone appears to have uploaded over my image in 2007, but I can't completely clear that. I suppose it's my fault for not having chosen a better name than "Cask ales" when I originally uploaded the image in 2006! SilkTork *YES! 20:17, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA[edit]

Wikipe-tan mopping.png Thank you for your participation at my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to act in ways that earn your full confidence, even though I don't have it now. Cirt (talk) 01:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

South America[edit]

Hello OwenX, I noticed about a week ago that you introduced a short term block against 200.118.20.28 for edit warring. I just wanted to stop by and request that you reexamine that editors ongoing practises,in particular their seeming obsession with introducing large gaps in the layout of the South America article, despite many many warnings, requests and numerous reverts from other editors, this editor just doesn't seem to take the hint. I'm not quite sure what it is exactly they're hoping to achieve by this endeavour, but many attempts to discourage them have simply been ignored. I wonder if you could take a look and perhaps suggest a solution to this ongoing problem. thanks Deconstructhis (talk) 18:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello again OwenX, it appears that despite the previous blocks you've imposed on this individual and all the warnings, they've decided to resume 'business as usual' against the South America article. Some people never learn. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 19:43, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Deconstructhis, while I agree that this anon's latest edits are harmful to the article, they can no longer be considered "vandalism". The edits are a good-faith, albeit misguided attempt to beautify the article. Please try to engage the editor in discussion. In any case, let me know if he breaches WP:3RR, and be mindful not to hit the 3RR limit yourself. Owen× 22:46, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Financial crisis of 2007-2008[edit]

The edit you made to Financial crisis of 2007-2008 redirecting illiquid asset to high-yield debt is, I think, inappropriate; that is junk bonds. Part of the problem with securitized subprime mortgages is that they are not-high yield and were often rated AAA initially. Now, downgraded and with the ongoing subprime mortgage crisis their value is quite uncertain which makes them illiquid. That is the term Treasury Secretary Paulson used to describe them. Fred Talk 14:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Fred, I was ambivalent about it myself. However, please note that illiquid asset was already a redirect to toxic debt, which was no more than a poorly-written stub with minimal context. I chose to merge toxic debt with high-yield debt; there may be better choices around--I'd be happy to add the 'toxic' section to a more suitable article. Or perhaps leave toxic debt as a redir to high-yield debt, but find a better target for illiquid asset? I'd welcome your suggestions. Owen× 15:23, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Toxic debt is tendentious and should probably be deleted. It is a phrase in use, but probably should not be a Wikipedia article. I'm not sure illiquid assets, however well-written, could support an independent article. The issue is liquidity. Fred Talk 16:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
My thoughts exactly! Which is why I turned both Toxic debt and Illiquid asset into redirects, to High-yield debt and Market liquidity, respectively. Both toxic debt and illiquid asset are likely search phrases, so they should stay as a redirect to the more general articles. Owen× 16:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Wort (brewing)[edit]

Hi Owen - would you move Wort (brewing) to Wort. The beer wort is the most likely search, the other worts are not likely to be direct "wort" searches and are dealt with by the disamb page. Thanks 11:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

sorry[edit]

sorry, but a.c.a.b. is a part o reality in europe and should be in this FREE encyclopedia

thanks anyway —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabinsaban (talkcontribs) 18:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

i understand[edit]

even i don't understand your reasons, i'll stop doing that because i respect wikipedia although my articole has his importance for europeans thank you again for illuminating my mind

Sabinsaban (talk) 18:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

User:G808[edit]

In all fairness, all the kid's activities occurred within the space of four minutes, and it's entirely possible he didn't have any idea he was racking up warnings or doing anything wrong. I request a lot of blocks on people myself so I'm no bleeding heart, but in this case an indefinite block might be too harsh. —Largo Plazo (talk) 19:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair point. I've shortened the block to 48 hours. Owen× 19:19, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

My deleted Article[edit]

I wrote an article a few minutes ago entitiled Emma chilvers, i wrote it about the woman i love, and i had to edit it several times. You have deleted it and i don't know why. All i did was write an article about the most amazing person in my life. Can you restore this article so i can show people just how much i love her thanks,

Karl Karl9998 (talk) 20:40, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

J.A.R. James and Richard[edit]

how do i get my page to be accepted in wikepdia? i am in a band and we are gonna be famous in 2 years. we want to start a page showing the history of our band other bands are on here and it tell you everything about them. but who is to judge whos better then one another, were all equal. i hope that you will let us creat our page. if not we will just wait till were famous that way you guys will recognise us. and mabye if you let us write our article we will donate funds to support wikepedia. thanks for listing to us. i hope that you will reconsider bringing back our article for it is about a good band that is gonna be main stream in a fiew years"Jarmusic2 (talk) 20:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)"

You're gonna be famous in two years? Excellent; come back in two years and by then someone else will probably have already written the article about your band. See Wikipedia:Notability (music) for what is acceptable here. Owen× 20:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

ok so all we have to do is wait. thats fair. i dont want to cause any problems, i thought that all articls were accepted here but i guess not. I will not make any more pages cause i dont really understand the gidlines. sorry for causing any problems with wikie. i hope you can forgive me owen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarmusic2 (talkcontribs) 20:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the advicr[edit]

ok so all we have to do is wait. thats fair. but when we are famous, can I ask Who is gonna write this article about us that you say is gonna happen? Well dont want to cause any problems, i thought that all articls were accepted here but i guess not. I will not make any more pages cause i dont really understand the gidlines. sorry for causing any problems with wikie. i hope you can forgive me owen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarmusic2 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:OwenX"

Jarmusic2 (talk) 21:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

We're not mad at you, and you're welcome to stay. It's just that there are certain basic requirements for articles, if they're to remain here, as you can see in WP:MUSIC. It's the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, not the encyclopedia that includes everythingpeople want to add. If and when you are famous, there will be plenty of people who want to write about you. It's more or less a consequence of famousness. Acroterion (talk) 22:10, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

ok owenX so you seem to have this all figured out, now when i creat the page for my username i can put what ever i want on there with in reason right. so i can just talk about the band on there, or are you gonna shut that down also? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarmusic2 (talkcontribs) 03:17, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

The guidelines for writing a Userpage are listed here. In short, if the whole purpose of your editing here is to advertise your band, chances are the page will be removed. Also, please don't delete text from Talk pages like you've done here. Other people want to be heard too. Owen× 12:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for that...[edit]

OwenX, I realize this offends you, and I apologize. But all I was trying to do was crack down on vandalism, and reduce the number of vandals. Considering how this affects you, I'll report vandalism directly to the board and let them do the rest. Commander Lightning of the WSP —Preceding undated comment was added at 20:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC).

Ted Spread[edit]

OwenX How do you get charts on the ted spread? What symbols do you use? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.16.190.44 (talk) 22:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Here is one source. Owen× 23:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Another move request[edit]

In Rock (Deep Purple album) should be Deep Purple in Rock - as that is the name of the album.[1] [2]. Regards SilkTork *YES! 21:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Just looking at the history of the two articles, it looks like User:Joe routt has done a piece by piece cut and paste from Deep Purple in Rock to In Rock - and then User:Koavf moved In Rock to In Rock (Deep Purple album) and In Rock became a disamb page. It's a bit of a mess as the history is wrong. I notice that User:Oxymoron83 has got involved, and that user is an admin. I'll speak to Oxymoron83 and involve User:Joe routt and User:Koavf as I can now see that it's really just a matter of restoring Deep Purple in Rock to this edit, editing In Rock to direct to the correct Deep Purple article name, and returning In Rock (Deep Purple album) to this edit, all of which I can do. I'll be in touch if I need any assistance. Regards SilkTork *YES! 22:24, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Would you mind casting your eye over what I had done to check I have done it all correctly? Thanks SilkTork *YES! 22:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

"woundering"[edit]

owen x i want 2 get a Requests for adminship, and it says that somone can nominate me, I was woundering if you would nominate me, i would like to help out wikeipedia and sinse im broke i want 2 be a person in charge and 2 restor order. thanks for listening 2 me and hope u nominate me id really make an impact here in the wkiie comunuty —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarmusic2 (talkcontribs) 06:12, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Four days ago you created a silly little attack page against me (and tried to forge your signature on it; we all had a good laugh), and now you're asking for my help? The only "impact here in the wkiie comunuty" that you're interested in making is to promote your band. Please don't waste my time. Owen× 12:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Superhero[edit]

It looks like no less than three of us rushed to speak with the vandal who edited Superhero. You two were faster than me, however. Cheers, GentlemanGhost (talk) 22:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Ted Spread with ETF's[edit]

Do you know of any way I could use Etf's to make money when the Ted Spread narrows? I know that it can be done with a commodities account but I am trying to find a way to do it with etf's. Thanks 66.16.190.44 (talk) 18:42, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't know of any effective way to use ETFs to bet on the TED spread. The closest I can think of is iShares Credit Bond (NYSEArca:CFT), which tracks a blend of corporate paper. Once LIBOR drops back to typical historical levels, CFT will likely climb back above $95, although the two are only statistically linked; one doesn't force the other. It also ignores the T-Bill side of the spread; SPDR Lehman 1-3 Month T-Bill (AMEX:BIL) is a T-Bill ETF, but it is a fixed income instrument--its value doesn't correspond with the yield on T-Bills, so shorting it as part of a spread wouldn't get you any closer to the TED spread. AIM has a mutual fund that tracks the LIBOR return, but I don't think it is suitable as a trading instrument. Owen× 00:59, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Credit Default Swaps[edit]

Hi there,

The picture you reinstated is totally misleading since it shows a payment at t6; after the underlying has defaulted. In a CDS the fixed leg payments stop after default obviously so this payment should not be shown and is likely to confuse those new to the subject of credit derivatives.

Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.32.72.252 (talk) 21:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


Your RfA is ready![edit]

SilkTork, your new RfA page is ready for you to accept my nomination and answer the questions. I'll transclude the page once you've done that. Good luck! Owen× 15:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Owen. I've accepted and answered the questions. SilkTork *YES! 16:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

My round[edit]

Dionysus Qingdao beer.jpg Have a beer on me.

Let the amber nectar flow all day and night. Let it run down the mountains and through the caverns and across the rich lawns to swamp the streets. Let it rain beer. Let the heavens open and shine forth beer. Let it all be beer. Wonderful beer. And let it be as deep as the heart of a lion.

This is my acknowledgment of your participation in the RfA of: SilkTork *YES! 19:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J.P. Turner & Company, LLC[edit]

Yes check.svg Done. I use a script to close AfDs, and it must have missed the other page. Thanks for letting me know, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:50, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Why[edit]

Why did you cross out my edit to Kanonkas. Christianster94 doesn't have two accounts, he only has one account. Julianster talk 23:09, 26 January 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christianster94 (talkcontribs)

Codex Regius[edit]

There are more manuscript with that name. In the 19th century Minuscule 28 was known as Regius 379 (now it is usually known as Minuscule 28 in the Gregory-Aland numbering). It is also known as Colbertinus 4705. Minuscule 29 used names like Regius 89, Colbertinus 6066 and several others.

Codex Vaticanus 2066 has several names (Uncial 046), sometimes it is known - rarely - as Codex Basilianus (Basilianus means Regius). A lot of manuscripts have several names, different in books written by scholars, different in popular books. The article Pericopes of Henry II uses only popular names, name used by scholars is even does not mentioned in the article. I have problem with identification this manuscript. There are more articles like this. Manuscripts have several names. Why you did not ask me? Do you want professional wikipedia, or wikipedia based on popular sources? Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 17:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Jańczuk: I don't know whether the term Codex Regius is used more often to refer to the Icelandic manuscript or the New Testament one. However, having a disambiguation page called Codex Regius (disambig) will not solve any problem. Disambiguation pages are usually created when there are three or more possible uses for a term. In our case, there are exactly two, and each of them references the other in the top line of the page, making it obvious for the reader to skip to the other page if needed. No one is likely to search the term "Codex Regius (disambig)", and changing all the links from "Codex Regius" to "Codex Regius (disambig)" will not make things any clearer or easier for anyone, as it would require all readers to select a link, rather than just some of them.
If you have convincing evidence that the New Testament use is far more common than the other, please present your case in the two articles' Talk pages, and we'll rename the latter to Codex Regius (Icelandic manuscript), and leave the former as simply Codex Regius. Owen× 17:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
"Disambiguation pages are usually created when there are three or more possible uses for a term." Thanks, I will remember. I have not too much experience with "disambig pages". Sorry. In that case your decision was correct. With regards. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 18:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
No problem. It is always a pleasure dealing with educated, civilized scholars such as yourself. Owen× 18:14, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Cotonti CMS deleted[edit]

What you're saying is that because something is new it doesn't meet your high standards? Don't hold a double standard simply because you don't know what certain things are. I'll link you to Wikipedia's own spam definition just to further prove my point. This article had content, explanations, and cited sources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam_(electronic)#Blog.2C_wiki.2C_and_guestbook_spam.

I apologize for my irritation.

I'll kindly ask that you replace the article as soon as possible. I thank you for your assistance in this matter, and thank you for your dedicated support to Wikipedia. Jslowik 19:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

The reference for spam that you provided is not the relevant one; the one dealing with deleting advertising material is here:
Blatant advertising. Pages that exclusively promote some entity and that would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic.
The article in question (Cotonti) met the above definition, and was deleted as such. The "cited sources" you mention were all links to the software maker's own website, so it is disingenuous of you to suggest the article was well cited. Please review our policies before posting advertising material here. I would also appreciate if you abstain from personal attacks; such behaviour here will achieve nothing. Owen× 19:42, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

My apologies for the personal attacks. Frustration. Removed. One of our links was a reference to a very well known and respected community (Neocrome.net) which developed the Seditio and LDU engines that Cotonti is based off of. If you'll reinstate the article (giving the author more than a few hours to edit the page) I will give you no fewer than two additional references, none of which are the maker's website. A look at my history on Wikipedia will show you that I'm not interested in spam. And once again I offer my sincere apologies. Thank you.

Fair enough. I have restored and moved the article to your own user space so you can work on it peacefully and bring it to an acceptable encyclopedic level. Once it is ready, please contact me or another admin to move it back to the main article space (don't attempt a "cut and paste move"!). Please be aware that even after the advertising tone issue is taken care of, you will still face a much bigger problem of establishing notability. Without proven notability, your article will likely be nominated for deletion, and removed within a week or so. Owen× 20:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate all your help. I will work hard to bring the article up to snuff for you. Much thanks Jslowik 20:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jslowik (talkcontribs)

IP 67.175.111.218 again[edit]

Considering this edit, you may want to revisit IP user 67.175.111.218 's block history. Thanks, Elphion (talk) 19:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Forged Signatures?[edit]

Dear, OwenX, what are you typing on my talk page for something I did not do? Well, I guess I did, but I'll explain later. The second statement you gave me is am I trying to funny for using some other user's signature? Listen, I have problems with another user, User:Julianster, who gets on my user name and does what he needs to do! I sometimes forget to log myself off allowing him to do what he needs to do! All right! I hope that unneccessary mess is straighened out. talk 22:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

How can you not trust me? Allow me to type this "again" so you can understand. I "forget" to log myself off and my "brother" who lives with "me" gets on Wikipedia under my user and does all his editing under "my" user account. Yes, I am responsible, but "I'm" not lying to you. Please don't take it so hard on me because old habits are hard to break. User talk:Christianster94 03:03, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Magnus Aarbakke[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Magnus Aarbakke. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. seicer | talk | contribs 15:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Soltam Systems logo.png)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Soltam Systems logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:15, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that[edit]

I misread it, heh. I thought it said number, not prime. That was bloody stupid of me.

Draaglom (talk) 18:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Love's Labours Lost in Space[edit]

Why are you adding uncited claims to the article above? Everything you've added has been taken off since Aug 2007. Can't you find a single cite for what you've added? Alastairward (talk) 16:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Sun D'Or logo.png)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Sun D'Or logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: AfD for Colleen Nestler[edit]

True, but AfD isn't a vote, so I pay pore attention to the strength of each argument. In this case, I feel the editors in favor of deletion had stronger evidence to back up their claims. Also, I tend to be ever-so-slightly deletionist when it comes to BLPs. :) Hope this helps, –Juliancolton | Talk 16:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Even so, the arguments for deletion were, in my opinion, far stronger than those for keeping the article, regardless of the article's title. Perhaps it would be best to initiate a discussion at DRV, so we can get some outside opinions. Regards, –Juliancolton | Talk 17:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Oil tanker[edit]

Hello Owen. I see you find the section that I deleted relevant. Although it is referenced, I disagree. I would like to go over the text:

Despite the size, a ULCC is heavily automated.

Size does not have anything to do with automation and a ULCC is not more automized then you would expect from a factory.

Computers and satellite navigation take care of most of the work.

This is incorrect. Satnav may have made navigation easier, the work was already done by one man; the mate. And the bridge isn't and wasn't the place where most of the work is done. That is in the engineroom. Automization does play a big role there, but that is not done by computers. And maintenance is certainly not performed by computers.

Only a small crew is needed, and the ships can be driven by a single person.

This is partly true. The crew can be small, especcially on a new ship. And the bridge is normally only manned by one mate. But the last part of the sentence gives a false interpretation, as if you could singlehandedly steer it around the world.

The top speed of a supertanker when carrying a full load can be as much as 18 mph.

About 20, I would say, but that's not really important.

http://www.worsleyschool.net/science/files/supertanker/page.html Oil Supertanker Specifications

As a reference, this hardly qualifies, it is not even a nautical college. All in all, I didn't like the section. In an attempt to write popular science, the subject is simplified too much. Regards, BoH (talk) 10:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Elbit Systems Ltd logo.png)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Elbit Systems Ltd logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Moinsoon[edit]

Hi OwenX, I have a little question about your block of Moinsoon. Your reason for blocking is given as a long history of vandalism, and a vandalism only account, but the edit summary of this user doesn't follow that description. I only see 3 edits since 2007, one of those being a reversion of his/her own vandalism (i.e. just experimenting). Previous edits were 2 years ago, and contained a mixture of good and bad edits. Am I missing something (i.e. are there some deleted edits that I'm not privy to that are influencing your decision?) Just curious -- I thought maybe the block was a little too soon?? Thx ~ Ciar ~ (Talk) 03:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Moinsoon has a total of 26 edits over two years: the 25 you see on his Contributions list, and an attack page that has since been deleted. Out of those, I found a total of two edits which I consider useful: this and this. Reverting his own vandalism is neither here nor there. I think it is very kind of you to call this "a mixture of good and bad edits". It is clear that his primary reason for editing is to bad-mouth his friends/schoolmates. He blessed us with an 18 month absence, but upon his return, the last three edits make it clear he hasn't matured or abandoned his past habits. He has received numerous warnings, which he was quick to remove from his Talk page. He knows his actions aren't welcome, continues to disrupt, and nothing short of a block will keep him away. In cases of short-term vandalism I issue a temporary block, but this is not the case here. I do, however, appreciate your concern, and welcome any criticism of my actions. Owen× 16:37, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

My AfD closures[edit]

Hi. To expound upon my response to you at my RfB, I've closed well over 2,000 AfDs with an accuracy rate of about 99%. As such, I have a large amount of experience in determining which arguments hold more water. And though it may appear I let my personal feelings get in the way, I assure you I always remain neutral when preforming administrative actions. Moreover, if my decisions are disputed, I do my utmost to discuss the matter with other editors and come to a solution. Don't mean to come across... err, what's the word?... but I hope you understand. Cheers, –Juliancolton | Talk 12:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

How exactly did you determine the 99% figure? Is it that only 1% got overturned at DRV? Very few XfDs are ever brought to DRV, even those that were closed in a dubious manner, and out of the few that make it to DRV, many are left deleted not because the process is endorsed, but because people side with the original Delete opinions. I have closed many AfDs myself without a single overturn at DRV, but I'd never claim a 100% "accuracy rate".
While most of your AfD closures seem correct, the small sample I checked reveal an alarmingly high rate of what I can only see as a deletionist's bias. Lack of consensus is exactly that--not an invitation to cast the deciding !vote. Owen× 14:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, about 1% have been contested, yes. Also, I consider myself a strong inclusionist, so any examples of a deletionist's bias would be appreciated. –Juliancolton | Talk 14:38, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi OwenX, can you please try to explain to me why you think AfD closures have something to do with Julian's abilities to promote users to admins, approve bots, and rename users? I feel like you're opposing a non-existent adminship reconfirmation. This is a request for bureacratship, and IMO at least, AfD closures have nothing to do with cratship. iMatthew talk at 21:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I thought I was clear on the RfB itself, but I am happy to explain. Someone who ignores or overrides consensus or lack thereof on AfDs is likely to do the same on RfAs. I don't want a bureaucrat who will promote a candidate despite obvious lack of consensus because the "Support" opinions seemed more valid to him. Owen× 22:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate your participation at my RfB, and of course I respect your opinion, but could you please stop accusing me of "overriding consensus"? I assure you I do nothing of the sort, at least not intentionally. Your concerns are valid, but I think your tone is a bit off. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 22:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Julian, I am sorry about the tone. As I took care to point out, I don't think you are doing this with malice or ill intent. However, as you seem to have taken upon yourself to be the primary closer of AfDs (an admirable task, don't get me wrong!), it is crucial that your closing criteria not only reflect overall consensus, but also overlap the criteria of other closing admins. We may argue about matching consensus, but I don't think anyone can deny that you tend to close AfDs differently from other admins. I, for one, believe the project will benefit if you avoided closing any AfD in situations where other admins would have closed it differently--and I'm sure you know exactly which cases those are. Owen× 23:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Point taken. However, I'd just like to note that Charlie the Unicorn is currently at DRV, so feel free to voice your opinion there. –Juliancolton | Talk 23:41, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
I understand now. However this thread may be of interest to you. iMatthew talk at 00:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The deleted message[edit]

I would just like to say that I asked iMatthew to not oppose such concerns as you have stated. I pointed out that there was enough responses to make it a concern. Although I do not think it is oppose worthy myself, others might. I think he would need to realize that regardless of how this RfA turns out. I informed him this directly. I believe that he wanted to ensure that there was no disputing or the rest intended, and he removed it immediately. A struck request still leaves a comment for the sake of the conversation. However, this was a withdraw before a conversation, so there is no real confusion. (By the way, I think you made a slip saying that it was an "AfD" instead of "RfA".) Cheers. Ottava Rima (talk) 13:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes, that's pretty much what I thought had happened. However, you'd have to agree that if at this point in his Wiki-career an RfA candidate still requires this level of hand-holding and supervision, some might see him as not quite ready for adminship. Oh, and thanks for pointing out my typo! Owen× 14:05, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I wouldn't see it as hand holding. It is more of something that few can really see - some opposes he should just accept without any question, comment, or response, even if you disagree with them. There are some arguments that can be made, but this kind of oppose is something that, even if not true, the -appearance- of it exists. It is a lesson that he has learned, and a lesson that is hard to learn as you rarely have your whole character analyzed in such a fashion. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:11, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Chia Teck Leng[edit]

Dear OwenX,

I do not understand your reason for blocking me for a topic on Chia Teck Leng who was a the mastermind of a SGD190million bank fraud and sentenced for 42years. You yourself are abusing your power and are a vandal in your own right.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Fhiggo64 (talkcontribs)

What the hell are you talking about?? I never blocked you! I unblocked you once, four years ago. Is that your subtle way of thanking me for that? Owen× 13:37, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Manuel P. Asensio[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

I have nominated Manuel P. Asensio, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manuel P. Asensio. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Cameron Scott (talk) 09:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I had no idea this article had been deleted once before via OTRS action. That's amazing. Going back through the contributions, I notice that the article has been a kind of slo-mo battlefield, with nuermous IPs and several SPAs created to either add puff or libel, with the latter apparently oversighted as I can't find it. Hopefully one outcome of the legal threat is that more eyes will be on this article. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 13:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, this article just goes from one POV extreme to the other... I once wrote a commentary on Seeking Alpha about how short sellers and hedge-fund managers are the witch-hunt victims of the 21st century, even when they benefit the public. I really appreciate everything you've done for the article. Owen× 13:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey, thanks very much. You know, it's funny, but actually I was thinking of asking myself, as I was interested in using one of those automated vandalism tools.
I see your point on witch hunts, and in fact I can understand how one can take that position on Asensio. The problem is that it's been such a struggle keeping junk out of this article that there just hasn't been any energy left over to expand the article in a neutral way. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 14:04, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

The Rescuers[edit]

While I appreciate your concern, I must state my belief that this is not an edit war but is, in fact, removing something that is making speculation not backed up by the cited source. The offending statement is below:

Sources indicate that the film has been, along with a small number of other Disney films, added to Walt Disney Home Entertainment's prestigious "Platinum Collection" line and will be released as such on DVD and Blu-ray on March 12, 2013.

The cited source is a Spanish DVD info website instead of a self-published blog; that much I grant out without any problem. However, when the source is translated into English, it's merely a description of the plot of the film. The header of the article does suggest that the film will become part of the Platinum Edition line, which the editor added to the article. However, there are two problems with that statement ...

First, there is no indication in the cited article which region will receive this release: is it Spain or North America? The other provided dates in the article are for the North American releases, so a reasonable reader would make the assumption that this subsequent release is also for North America, a statement not backed up by the cited source. Second, Disney has shifted its promotional language to "Diamond Edition" in North America, apparently retiring "Platinum Edition" at the same time. So that would again seem to point toward this release (i.e., "Platinum Edition" Blu-ray) not being intended for North America; this is not to say that North America won't get a BD release of this film, but it could conceivably be earlier than the mentioned date and with no "insert precious substance Edition" labeling.

Speaking of the date: the cited source only mentions a month and a year, while the poster has added an actual calendar date. Again, this is speculation not backed up by the source data. To compound matters, the Spanish site indicates that the March 2013 date is "por confirmar." This translates as "to be confirmed" ... in other words, it's somebody's speculation, not fact. Official press releases on the site are labeled as "anuncio oficial"—"official announcement". The cited source article is labeld "avance"—literally "advance," or probably in this usage "preview" or "teaser."

I will transcribe this discussion to the article's talk page so that other editors can weigh in and we reach consensus. Until that time, if the statement gets added back, I won't revert it, as a pledge of good faith.

--McDoobAU93 (talk) 19:46, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Email[edit]

You have one. Cheers, –Juliancolton | Talk 04:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Lloyd Marshall[edit]

I created a new article for Lloyd Marshall. The history states you were the deleting administrator, so I wanted to contact you/put you on notice. The reason I created this article is that Marshall was recently elected to the International Boxing Hall of Fame. The article is thin since it would be better to check on its deletion status before making a detailed article. Thanks RonSigPi (talk) 13:50, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. The old page was deleted due to copyright violation. I don't see any problem with the new article. Owen× 21:32, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Block request[edit]

OwenX, This IP belongs to my school district, and it seems as though few to no constructive edits have been made by this IP. Considering that most students are more inclined to vandalize Wikipedia rather than contribute to it (with most potential contributors such as I already having registered accounts and therefore unaffected by the block), may I request that this IP be blocked for one more year (or permanently, if policy permits)? It should make life easier for the admins and anti-vandalism unit members :). 12.107.72.2 (talk) 12:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

This is certainly an odd request! But after checking recent activity, I agree with you. Done! Owen× 14:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Regional Science High School for Region III[edit]

OwenX, please watch the page against the vandalism especially in Notable Alumni section that will result in edit warring. Thank you! 203.87.176.18 (talk) 22:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I am watching it, but we'll need to cite sources showing those listed are actual alumni of this school. Owen× 22:55, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

The relocation information held Miss World 2010 is not correct, this event will still be held in Vietnam on December 6, 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbmainam (talkcontribs) 10:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

RAAS Group - sponsor, the applicant has withdrawn from the contest. but this does not mean d0o not held in Vietnam. They are finding new sponsors —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbmainam (talkcontribs) 10:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

The relocation information held Miss World 2010 is not correct, this event will still be held in Vietnam on December 6, 2010. RAAS Group - sponsor, the applicant has withdrawn from the contest. but this does not mean not held in Vietnam. They are finding new sponsors —Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.169.106.229 (talk) 10:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Regional Science High School for Region III[edit]

Hi. I was servicing a SPER on this article concerning Jackie Rice as a notable alumni. Since this seems to be one of the edit warring hot spots, I declined the request, but tagged the alumni with {{fact}} tags and asked 203.87.176.18 (talk), who originally added the alumni, to provide reliable sources this month. I see that you also asked him to support those claims in March 2009. Will you be OK with removing these entries at the beginning of May if they remain unsourced? Thanks, Celestra (talk) 13:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely! I leave this in your capable hands. And by the way, as you seem to be an experienced, trustworthy editor, I added the Rollbacker feature to your account. Owen× 14:26, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Celestra (talk) 16:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Benjy Bronk[edit]

You have locked "Benjy Bronk" article bio section to read he is of "fat and ugly descent" Suite9000 (talk) 15:34, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks! Owen× 16:28, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Change to Leech Lattice page[edit]

Dear Owen --

Thanks -- you are right, the minor edit I made was wrong; I could not undo it since you had already corrected it. I realized that I had made a mistake a few hours after making the changes, since realized that I misinterpreted the length of x (namely √x.x) as the value of the quadratic form on x (namely x.x).

Short version: -- thanks for undoing my changes so that the article is mathematically correct,

SpecZ (talk) 17:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries! I make mistakes all the time, and wasn't too sure about this one either. I hope to see more of your work on the math-related articles! Owen× 17:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


Benjy Bronk[edit]

You have locked "Benjy Bronk" article bio box section to read he is "loser" and "fat" and "oaf" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Locksoflove1 (talkcontribs) 05:50, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Owen× 15:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Help:Translate to Hebrew[edit]

Hello! I need some help on translation. Please translate the following words to Hebrew.

  • Bishop of Rome
  • Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople
  • Patriarch of Alexandria
  • Patriarch of Antioch
  • Patriarch of Jerusalem
  • Bishopric of Rome
  • Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople
  • Patriarchate of Alexandria
  • Patriarchate of Antioch
  • Patriarchate of Jerusalem

Thank you. Amit6 (talk) 13:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I'd love to help you, but (a) I'm not familiar enough with Christian terminology--especially not in Hebrew, and (b) I can't type in Hebrew, so while I can usually verify translations, or translate from Hebrew, I think one of the other editors you went to for help may be able to do a better job. Sorry! Owen× 14:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Test1a[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Test1a has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bsherr (talk) 13:30, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Rhus coriaria previously deleted[edit]

Hello, I wanted to start a page about Rhus coriaria, the species and the spice that comes from it, but apparently a page with that name has been previously deleted by you. As far as I can see the content of that deleted page is no longer accessible, so I can't see if it was garbage. Could you let me know what you think about this? Thanks. Nadiatalent (talk) 18:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The entire contents of that deleted page were the three words:
rhus coriaria cultivation
So it was deleted for lack of content/context. Feel free to write an actual article about the subject. Owen× 19:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Great! Thanks! Maybe on the weekend. Nadiatalent (talk) 19:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Please go to User talk:166.127.1.217 and take some further action[edit]

This anon. IP is at it again. Repeatedly. Please take some action. Viva-Verdi (talk) 00:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Square One Bus Terminal[edit]

My coordinates are correct. That is the Mississauga City Centre Transit Terminal. The GO Transit facility, if you read the article, is on Station Gate Road. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:25, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: Interwiki links to nonexistent Chinese pages[edit]

Thanks for your reminding. I like to comment on this rule of Wikipedia. Add a nonexistent Chinese pages is just for remind me/others to edit it later. Otherwise, people will have no initiative to modify the item and I will just forget it.

(Ph.eyes (talk) 06:53, 18 October 2010 (UTC))

I doubt that interwiki links to nonexistent pages will prompt anyone to create those pages. If the only purpose is to keep a reminder for you, I suggest you create a list on your own User page as you have been doing so far.
If you really want to prompt people to work on an article, the best way is for you to start a one or two line stub, and categorize it under the proper stub category. This way, people will see it show up in the category page, and are more likely to work on improving it. Owen× 12:56, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Moral and Social Vanguard Party Let's Go Golombia[edit]

Howdy - I've recreated this redirect deleted by you last year to repair some broken red links. - TB (talk) 10:22, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Benjy Bronk[edit]

Please note the libel/rumors of a sexual nature which are inappropriate for Wikipedia that Rockypedia cotinues to put on this page after it has been deleted —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oonaphi (talkcontribs) 13:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Benjy Bronk[edit]

OwenX, please note the material that Rockypedia continues to put up is libelous, misleading and a violation of Wikipedia policy. Therefore, I believe my removal of it is not vandalism, but a constructive edit. Thank You Oonaphi (talk) 14:08, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Please take the issue to the BLP noticeboard. Your continued edit war on the article page will only end with you being blocked from editing. Owen× 15:10, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Benjy Bronk[edit]

OwenX you have locked this article to read that he was accused of having a disease which he was never accused of, if you read the source it was clearly a humorous discussion, further that same source documents that he took the test and came up negative. (unsupported accusations themselves should not be part of wikipedia biographies in the first place) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Locksoflove1 (talkcontribs) 18:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Respectfully disagree with this slant. Firstly, it was more than a conversation, it was a significant event that spanned several days of broadcasts on the radio show on which Benjy is employed. It was humorous only in that it's a comedy show to begin with. Added to this, the info in question that one user (who may or may not be Bronk himself, we'll probably never know, although it seems likely, given his past history, discussed on the show, of him editing his own article many times) kept deleting was accurate, and although it may have been slanted slightly negative, when I re-entered it I edited the info to be more objective. The user used various sock puppets to try to keep vandalizing the page after each user was (rightfully) blocked. It also appears that Locksoflove1 is likely another sock puppet given his only previous contribution is also to the Benjy Bronk page. OwenX has done the right thing here, no question about it. Rockypedia (talk) 05:32, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sun D'Or logo.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sun D'Or logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:46, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Benjy Bronk[edit]

Owen, please read the source Rockypedia cited and see that language the wikipedia entry was written in was intended to confuse and disparage and change the meaning of the source and certainly imply things that weren't true...thanks and OCanada! :) Archhow (talk) 05:09, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

More Benjy Bronk sock puppets[edit]

It appears that more sock puppets have been brought to light and/or just created with the sole purpose of vandalizing the Bronk page.

BlessYes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/BlessYes) appears to have been making the same attempts at changes (changing Bronk's age to be 4 years younger) in a 5-day span in 2006, then in 2007 making some changes to the Howard 100 News page that also involve Bronk. This user has once again become active on the Bronk page making the same exact changes as the other Archhow sock puppets.

More recently, Brazil4Olympics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Brazil4Olympics) was created 4 days ago, made some innocuous edits in order to become a trusted editor, and then resumed the sock-puppet activities on the Bronk page.Rockypedia (talk) 05:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I found the edits by Brazil4Olympics to be reasonable. I suggest you take the matter to the BLP Noticeboard instead of continuing this edit war. Owen× 16:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC)'
Those particular edits were reasonable, I agree; but this makes 5 sock puppets editing only this page, just looking to address that issue somehow.Rockypedia (talk) 06:21, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
I have blocked one of them as an obvious sock, but I am not convinced all five are sockpuppets. It is best to address the underlying article issue rather than chase editors. Owen× 13:03, 10 December 2010 (UTC)