User talk:SchuminWeb

SchuminWeb

Current Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 New message Unprotected talk

Welcome! Please leave any Wikipedia-related messages to me on this page. Please do not contact me via The Schumin Web, instant messenger, Facebook, or any other off-wiki communication venues for matters regarding Wikipedia (you may, however, use the "Email this user" function). You will receive no response if you comment in any other places. I will be happy to discuss issues related to Wikipedia with you on my Wikipedia talk page, or any other Wikipedia venue. Likewise, please do not use this talk page to discuss my personal Web site and non-Wikipedia-related matters. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated.

If I deleted your article: If you are writing to discuss an article that was speedily deleted, please read the criteria for speedy deletion first, specifically the one that is cited in the deletion log for the deleted article. Please leave a wikilink (double brackets) to the article in question, despite its deleted status, in order to save time on researching your request.

If I made an action that you disagree with: If you are writing to comment on an action that you disagree with, first just fix it, and then tell me what you fixed and why you fixed it. This permission also includes reverting administrative actions that I have made. I won't wheel war with you if you revert an administrative action. Just make sure you tell me that you did. I am not above occasionally making mistakes, and it is possible that I did make a mistake. I'd rather be told that I erred and why than be ordered by another editor to fix something that may have been done incorrectly. I'll probably agree with you that your change was a good thing. If not, we'll discuss. After all, every mistake is a learning opportunity.

This page is protected from editing by anonymous users and users who are not yet autoconfirmed. If you wish to leave me a message and you fall into this category, please leave your message at:

• User talk:SchuminWeb/Unprotected talk page

Otherwise, feel free to leave me a message. Responses to inquiries left here will be answered here. I generally make use of the {{talkback}} template to notify users of responses left here.

User:Jab7842

Hi SchiminWeb. I came across User:Jab7842 yesterday when I found some very strange redirects from this user, such as [1] which i reverted. I also warned the user on their talk page. I see from my watchlist that further odd redirects are happening today, which you have been reverting. And that the user moved their user page and talk page to article space. These pages were then deleted, along with their user and talk pages. Now the user has effectively erased their histories on those pages and is continuing to make suspect redirects to a lot of articles. Is this normal? I'm not clear why Jab7842 has not been warned for this continued behavor and potentially even blocked? Many thanks for any light you can shed on this, Sparthorse (talk) 01:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Based on what I've encountered, it would seem like this user is trying, but hasn't a clue. That's why I was disinclined to block or even warn - because I'm still assuming good faith on their part, and hoping that maybe they will figure it out on their own without outside assistance. If it keeps up like this, then, of course, we'll need to say something and possibly go up the warning ladder, but I'm still hoping they'll figure things out for themselves before we have to go there. But I'm not ready to throw AGF out the window just yet. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:35, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I came here to ask about User talk:Jab7842 too, since seeing the redlinked "talk" link I was about to give him a {{welcome-belated}}. It's not usual to lose the user talk page history, is it? -- John of Reading (talk) 07:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, let me resurrect that... SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay, all set. SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and the restoration of the talk page. Sparthorse (talk) 18:28, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

FFD

Please redact the recent "borderline creepy" comments you've made on a number of FFDs. They are irrelevant, "borderline" incivility, and are more likely to inflame the situation than help. If the policy basis for your !vote is sound, adding a comment not based on any policy is pointless. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

No, I mean it - making a shrine to another user like that on one's userpage is a little creepy. I am entitled to my opinion on it, and that's putting it quite civilly. SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:11, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Certainly you're entitled to your opinion - however, that doesn't mean that expressing it publicly is a good idea. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:16, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

New Flyer XDE40

The new 2011 Xcelsiors been out since April of this year and wondering if you can upload a image of the fresh buses for the Metrobus fleet page — Preceding unsigned comment added by MJofLakeland (talk • contribs) 21:55, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I do not have any yet, unfortunately, except for a really poor cell phone photo that I took at a red light (that's so bad it's not worth uploading). When I get some decent WMATA Xcelsior photos, I will *definitely* upload them. I will add this to my list of things to do, so please do stay tuned. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:19, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Andy Harter.jpg

This was deleted as invalid fair-use claim. I spoke with Andy who agreed to release it under a free licence and has since emailed the appropriate address about this. I'd like to re-upload the image. Can I just do this to the same address? Thanks! Janderson99 (talk) 13:00, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Go for it. Don't forget to cite the OTRS ticket number in the file description page. SchuminWeb (Talk) 14:52, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Blanker

Hi Ben. I hope this is a low-key request after that other matter mixup. Anyway, User:216.3.102.114 keeps blanking out a valid and sourced section of the Like Crazy article. How does one stop it? Might you have a look and take some steps? Best wishes and thanks in advance. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 21:51, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

It would appear that PeterSymonds got to it before me, and blocked the miscreant. Seems a sound solution. Hopefully that block will make them recognize the error of their ways, but we'll see, I suppose. SchuminWeb (Talk) 02:50, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Ben. Peter seemed to have gotten on it from a Wikipedia IRC chat I was on. Best Wishes, always. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 04:28, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Jesse Dirkhising

Hello. Care to explain why you nominated and deleted the image of Jesse Dirkhising and not this File:Matthew Shepard.jpg and this File:LawrenceFobesKing.jpg? Those last two are not free images so why keep them and not Jesse? If you can delete Jesse then you must also delete the images of Matthew and Larry for the exact same reasons you successfully nominated Jesse for. Caden ^cool 21:46, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

BTW, I look forward to seeing your image nominations for deletion on Larry King and Matthew Shepard. Thank you. Caden ^cool 22:23, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I am still waiting to hear back from you. I see by your recent edits that you are currently online but appear to be avoiding me. Are you? Caden ^cool 23:44, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I find that you continuing to avoid my posts is unacceptable behavior for an admin. Caden ^cool 00:03, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

You saw the nomination. That is why. Now please stop messaging me. SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:14, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes I saw it and there was no consensus. Furthermore, why did you not delete the Matthew Shepard image or the Larry king image? Both are not free images but yet you have no issue with those images only Jesse's. Why is that Ben? What is the real issue here because at this point I question your deletion of Jesse and not those of Matthew or Larry. Why the double standard practice? What's going on Ben? Caden ^cool 00:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Wow, you're quick! Thanks for renaming all the Metro station articles and updating the wikilinks! :) --Aude (talk) 21:45, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:27, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Palace Hotel Silver Teapot c1900.jpg

Please have a look here. We can't know for sure what is "right" of "wrong" here as this falls under several policies. I only ask you, as an admin, to show some courtesy and understanding to the creator. To repeat, this is a conflict for changing one image in a gallery of 20, risking to lose a dedicated editor, who spent much time on this hotel article. There are millions others around to fix, and we are too few for that. If you're wondering why do I spent so much time on this, I saw good photographers leaving the project for such silly matters. We are all protective of our work. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 07:04, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Reopened discussion

Hi. I've taken the bold step of undeleting File:ATSF El Capitan combined x3.png because it did not satisfy F8 - not all versions were moved to Commons. As such, I've also reopened the discussion at FFD, as it appears to still be pertinent.

Cheers. Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:56, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Herbie290 requesting unblock

In his unblock request, he is offering to refrain from editing Dixie Square Mall ever again. He has been slow-edit-warring by making unsourced changes to a date in that article for several months now. This offer looks like an enforceable promise to me. If you agree and if you see the benefit of having such a promise on the record, let me know if you would consider an unblock on that condition. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 03:03, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Seems reasonable enough. I took care of it - thanks for letting me know. SchuminWeb (Talk) 13:27, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Dorking Chicken

The artists died before 1934 [8], so File:Dorking Chicken.jpg can be restored. I'll try and find a higher resolution version (I think I saw one) and then move it to Commons. On what basis are such images supposed to be deleted? (Is there any policy or such about this?) There are a lot of other images which are public domain in the U.S. only here, which could be but are not used in articles; I move them from Commons if I think it's very likely they will be used in an article, or if I want to put them in articles before confirming that they are public domain in the U.S. —innotata 15:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I've restored it, and I'm going ahead and moving it over to Commons now. As far as what basis free images should be deleted on en.wiki, generally, the standard is that images should be in use and encyclopedic. Of course, now that we know it's free in the source country and the USA, then we can have it on Commons, where stuff never gets deleted unless it falls short of inclusion criteria (see Commons:Commons:Scope) for whatever reason. Commons is great because stuff doesn't necessarily need to be in use to be put there. I've uploaded stuff that I have no intention of using in articles but still is worth having around. SchuminWeb (Talk) 20:10, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Did you make sure you moved all the information that was on the file description page? I think it gave the URL or other information on the source not now present. Where is the policy or rule requiring free images be used, and to what extent is that so? I don't like the idea that images such as File:Phyllodactylus trachydactylus, Hemidactylus forbesii.jpg, for which the author's death date is unknown but probably over 70 years ago, and for which articles on the subjects do not yet exist should be deleted. —innotata 21:59, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I use Move to Commons assistant to transfer files to Commons in most cases. I also double-checked the deleted revisions for the chicken file, and there was never a URL as a source. Just the book. So we're good on that front. Otherwise, I wouldn't worry too much about the orphaned file. I would consider it unlikely that it will be nominated for deletion any time soon. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Unprotect Bloody Knuckles

Could you please unprotect this page, since Bloody knuckles exists? The K needs to be capitalized. Thanks. Tinton5 (talk) 02:19, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Unprotected, per your request. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

PhilaCnty1854.jpg image removal

I believe that you are in error in removing the PhilaCnty1854.jpg image from Act of Consolidation, 1854. This is a government-produced image, which was made by the City of Philadelphia, City Plans Division, Bureau of Engineering and Surveys, and is clearly so marked at the lower right corner of the image, and dated August 18, 1959. As it is a government-produced image, it is in the public domain.

I shall attempt to re-upload the same image, which I am getting from the library of the University of Pennsylvania, and shall also properly reference that image as being public domain and obtained from a Commonwealth of Pennsylvania-owned university.Bill S. (talk) 15:10, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

First of all, if you can verify that the image is definitely free (and based on the age, I think it is on account on its age), I have no issues with your re-uploading. If you're going to do so, however, please do so on Wikimedia Commons rather than English Wikipedia, so that all Wikimedia projects may benefit from the image.

Secondly, I believe some clarification is in order as it relates to public domain government sources. The only instance in the United States where government works are definitely public domain is when it is produced by the federal government. Original works of state and local government agencies may be subject to copyright. If the content you were referring to had been more recent, it may have been subject to copyright (but as mentioned, I think the content is now PD due to its age). See Commons:Commons:Licensing#United_States for more information. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:56, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Chavezcoup.jpg

Why did you delete this file? There was no consensus to do so: There was one voice for, and another against. Please undo this action. Many thanks. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:11, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I have reviewed the discussion and all of the source material a second time, and I am going to stand by my close of delete. Your argument that it was "one of the classic historical photos of this particular event" did not explain what made it so classic. Additionally, your argument did not address why a reader needs to see a non-free photo to understand that the two met in person, rather than describing such an encounter textually, i.e. whether it satisfies WP:NFCC#8. You are welcome to take this matter to deletion review if you would like, but I do not intend to reverse myself in this instance. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:21, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

How bizarre. That was your evaluation of the consensus? OK, to deletion review we go. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 15:17, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Suspicious uploads

Since you patrol for the illegimate use of images, I thought I should bring to you attention User talk:Waldenbg, who has uploaded several very professional looking photographs taken by an assortment of cameras. This does not seem right. The only ones that I could find were of Canada's Wonderland. Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:54, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Definitely suspicious. I nominated File:Behemoth Canadas Wonderland.jpg for speedy deletion, since we located the source plus it has no metadata, and then I'm still looking at the others. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the rest, I definitely think something is up. Too many cameras, too much missing metadata, and honestly, it just looks a little too good. Maybe we have a serious photographer who is really into free content, but more likely I see a mass-nom to PUF in our future. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:38, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Fivemen.jpg

I do not see what you're going on about. This has a complete fair use rationale. Just not the template version. I cannot remember if this is before we switched to {{non-free use rationale}} or when I just completely avoided using it entirely. I know that you probably just tagged it because it lacked the template, because it has all of the information required by db-f7.—Ryulong (竜龙) 05:59, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

User:Centpacrr

Hi Ben, hope you're well! User:Centpacrr has contested the deletions of a few images on talk page. As the editor who nominated those files for deletion, your input would be appreciated. Thanks! Best, FASTILY ^(TALK) 23:01, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

None of these files had been "nominated for deletion", only questioned as being "non-free" for which, as you know, I provided extensive documentation to support that each was "free" and, at the time they were deleted, none of these PUF discussions had even been closed. Thus unilaterally deleting any of them without ever seeking the consensus of the community to do so is contrary to WP policy. Centpacrr (talk) 23:19, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I intend to respond to this (at User talk:Fastily), but it will likely not be until Sunday, when I return to my regular computer. In the meantime, hope everyone is having a good Thanksgiving weekend. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:42, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Mark Epstein (fighter)

Hello, I noticed that your the users who deleted Mark Epstien (fighter), and I think that you may of made a mistake doing that.

I want to start by pointing out that he meets the fighters criteria at WP:MMANOT, in which he meets -

• Subject of multiple independent articles/documentaries--articles should be from national or international media, not just local coverage or press releases from organizations

• Fought for the highest title of a top tier MMA organization

• Fought at least three (3) fights for top tier MMA organizations

He has competed for Cage Rage for most of his 14-11-0 MMA career, winning the Cage Rage World Heavyweight Championship, the Cage Rage World Light Heavyweight Championship, and the Cage Rage British Light Heavyweight Championship in the time when he competed for them.

There are also many articles on him, including this one - http://www.allsportspeople.com/mma/people/Mark_Epstein. This means that he also meets WP:GNG which as we know is the more important criteria for pages to meet.

I would like to think that this is plenty of information for you to decide, if not please let me know what else is there and I will find the information to convince you. Thanks. BigzMMA (talk) 20:21, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

As a proposed deletion, the article is restored. Note for proposed deletions: you don't have to explain to or convince the deleting admin about deletions via WP:PROD. Just ask nicely. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:41, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you very much, I thought I'd have to do some convincing to allow it back on, but still at leasts its back on now. BigzMMA (talk) 08:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Template:Retain orphaned

Hello! You recently removed this tag from numerous pages. Your edit summary was "Removing Template:Retain orphaned where page is no longer a talk page using AWB)" (the meaning of which I don't understand). I noticed this because Wikipedia:Ц was mistakenly deleted as a result.
Can you please explain the removals? Thanks! —David Levy 01:28, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

That edit summary was used when a bunch of orphaned file talk pages were moved to project space. That's why the tag was removed in those cases, because they were no longer talk pages nor orphaned. I don't understand how Wikipedia:Ц got in there, except that it sounds like it got included by mistake. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:37, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! —David Levy 01:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

File:JesseDirkhising.jpg

Hi Ben. I noticed you closed the JesseDirkhising.jpg deletion discussion. What is your position on an undelete or re-upload of the file should the editors of Murder of Jesse Dirkhising decide that they wish to use that picture in that article? Thanks, 28bytes (talk) 06:55, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

No strong opinion about a re-upload on any of these if people actually want to use them, though if you do so, they need to meet all ten criteria at WP:NFCC. SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, thanks for the speedy response. 28bytes (talk) 07:05, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Anna-Svidersky-2.jpg

Hi, I'm sorry but I had to IAR for a second to restore this file. Looking over what happened it seems that there was a procedural fragmentation that had little to do with any editorial concern. Regards ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 14:26, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem. See the thread right above this one. SchuminWeb (Talk) 15:44, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding. I've spent the past hour getting re-acquainted with editorial practices - or at least beginning to - and after braving through some NFCC backlogs I see that the issue continues to evolve and that interpretations have been massaged this way and that on the value of identification and illustration. If it turns out that my reading of the situation was grossly out of sync with the recent consensus on matter I'll undo the restoration. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 16:08, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

re File:JesseDirkhising.jpg et al

Since there were no arguments in favor of deletion (not even by the nominator) at the MfD, deleting these wasn't called for, so if you'd please restore them I'd be grateful.

It's not entirely clear if you deleted them as orphaned or some other reason. If it's for being orphaned, if you'll restore them I'll re-add them to their articles, from which they were removed only because they'd been deleted previously. Herostratus (talk) 06:25, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:JesseDirkhising.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:JesseDirkhising.jpg. 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. Herostratus (talk) 09:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 December 3#File:Centpacrr.jpg

FYI -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:23, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Misuse of administrative tools--or mistake?

In the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 December 5 it was pointed out that you both nominated the file File:JesseDirkhising.jpg for deletion, and then subsequently closed a later discussion on the topic in a not-very-defensible manner. This is concerning on two counts: First, the fact that a deleted file is currently orphaned is not a good reason for an administrator to overturn community consensus, especially when searching Wikipedia for the title of the file makes it obvious that there is at least one article would be appropriate for that file and de-orphaning it would have been trivial. Second, your violation of WP:INVOLVED is problematic. While there are clearly situations where administrators can and should intervene while involved, the legal problem (which could have been readily solved) does not appear to the community (at least, those who have commented on the DRV to-date) to merit your involvement. Having said that, all of us have bad days, and I can see making two mistakes like that if I were in a hurry; please be more careful in the future. I'm going to find a truly uninvolved admin to revert your close (I opined in the previous DRV) and restore the files. Feel free to dialogue on the matter when you return from Wikibreak. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 04:00, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Twinkle tag suggestion

Hello SchuminWeb. I posted a message to Twinkle's talk page suggesting to add the {{current}} template. We already have {{recentism}} so it would add a current template also. I've also contacted Amalthea about this suggestion. I would like your input and any objections you have for adding this tag. Thanks. -- Luke (Talk) 02:54, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Account at RationalWiki

Hi. Someone claiming to be you has created an account at RationalWiki with your name and copied your userpage over. Can you please confirm that it was you? Thanks. -- Nx / talk 22:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Not me. SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, the impostor has been blocked. Would you like me to rename the account/oversight your name? -- Nx / talk 00:38, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Go for it. I've never understood why people like to impersonate me online, but go fig, I suppose. SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:46, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Wasington Metro fare increase

I was editing the section Washington_Metro#Fare_structure and was thinking perhaps it is time to retire the paragraph on the Jan. 2010 fare increase. What do you think? Also, has peak-of-the-peak been implemented yet? If so, the section should be updated to be more than as of Aug. 2010.
Hgrosser (talk) 17:36, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rachel's Tears cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Rachel's Tears cover.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:54, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

National Archives ExtravaSCANza

You are invited to the National Archives ExtravaSCANza, taking place every day next week from January 4–7, Wednesday to Saturday, in College Park, Maryland (Washington, DC metro area). Come help me cap off my stint as Wikipedian in Residence at the National Archives with one last success! This will be a casual working event in which Wikipedians are getting together to scan interesting documents at the National Archives related to a different theme each day—currently: spaceflight, women's suffrage, Chile, and battleships—for use on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons. The event is being held on multiple days, and in the evenings and weekend, so that as many locals and out-of-towners from nearby regions1 as possible can come. Please join us! Dominic·t 01:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC) 1 Wikipedians from DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Newark, New York City, and Pittsburgh have been invited.

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/Continental Airlines

Template:Editnotices/Page/Continental Airlines has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:55, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Kritika Kamra

I want to create this Article "Kritika Kamra". Please help me....... Yamaaan 14:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Maryland Route 200

Category:Maryland Route 200, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Imzadi 1979 → 12:45, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Book cover fur

Template:Book cover fur has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:05, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Spamming?

Hi Ben. Do you know what this is all about? He keeps putting invitations on my talk page and I keep deleting them, and he keeps putting them back. A bot? I never heard of this editor: User talk:Walter55024. Please have a look. The message he keeps leaving on my talk page is:

Would you like to join my disscion at:User Talk:Worm That Turned/Adopt/Walter55024?--Walter55024 (talk) 22:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks and Bests. ---(Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 00:05, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

The vibe I'm getting, based on a sampling of their diffs, is that they are indeed acting in good faith, but they seriously don't have a clue. Either they're going to get the hang of things and become a productive member of Wikipedia, or they're going to leave out of frustration, or end up indef-blocked. Spamming out the URL for one's adoption page is clearly improper, but I don't think that the user realizes it. Hoping that the relatively short block that another user issued will get their attention on that. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:47, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Ben, for having a look and your determination. Hopefully it will settle down and the new young editor will learn something about our endeavor. But he does look clueless. Best Wishes, as always. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc (talk) 15:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)