User talk:Thirdbeach

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)[edit]

Hello, Thirdbeach, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here!

Yours truly,

20:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

eNom[edit]

I went and added my few cents, but it seemed for a while like they were intent on edit-warring. GreenJoe 03:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BOOO HOOO HOOOOOO! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.48.183.210 (talk) 15:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

KillAllSpammers/TeerGrub block[edit]

You're more than welcome. I was heavily suspicious, that's why I put in for the checkuser. GreenJoe 18:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't know. I wouldn't worry about it. GreenJoe 20:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikify[edit]

Sorry, my own lack of clarity there. I meant somewhere. Such a highly visible template would have first gone through discussion, about what it looks like; what the text should be; down to the insignificant borders around the template, etc. You were right to bring it yo the talk page, but you need outside opinions and a firmer consensus before I can update a template that's transcluded on thousands of pages. A request for comment is the best way. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 19:23, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. :) It needed one of the templates listed at WP:RFC. That automatically places it in the current RfC category, allowing people to come across and take a look. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nucular appeal[edit]

Thanks for your feedback and for your contributions to the Nucular appeal! Your reasoning, too, is sound, and is much appreciated. Cosmic Latte (talk) 05:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikify[edit]

Take a look! Congrats on 3/4 of your proposed style change getting through, Lifebaka updated the template for us just now. Nice work. ~ mazca ^{t | c} 17:01, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SpamSurgeon[edit]

First, checkuser is not an administrator tool; only a subset of administrators has access to it. Thus, I can't prove via checkuser whether it's a sockpuppet or not (and really, checkuser wouldn't prove it but would suggest a likely link).

As an administrator, though, I do look at edit history, and repeating the same sequence of edits leads to an immediate block for evasion. I can think of two or three indefinitely blocked or banned users who pop up once or twice a week (and get promptly blocked again).

Regarding the apparent use of another person's real name, that does concern me. I'm tempted to block that account for violation of the username policy, especially given that the use of the name is likely in bad faith. It's a fine line, sometimes, deciding whether to assume good faith or whether there's more malice behind something that is immediately evident. —C.Fred (talk) 21:42, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

KillAllSpammers / eNom[edit]

I'm tempted to go ahead and protect the article again, even though there's only been one IP edit. If there's a second, then it'll get a long period of protection, at least a month. —C.Fred (talk) 22:24, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...which it just got. —C.Fred (talk) 22:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly we were both looking at the watchlist at the same time - right as the IP made the edit. No problem fixing that. —C.Fred (talk) 22:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...And protect it again, apparently. That's why I keep it in mywatchlist. I wish I didn't have to, but with KillAllSpammers surfacing now and again... :( —C.Fred (talk) 14:38, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thirdbeach. You have new messages at C.Fred's talk page.
Message added 15:25, 18 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

List of domain name registrars[edit]

There was a lot of link duplication on the article so I've removed some of the duplicate links. The domaintools.com registrar stats page has only got stats for 2002-2007 and seemingly has not been updated. The webhosting.info figures on .com are approximately 2.4 million domains in error so I added a warning about the accuracy of the figures. ICANN's figures, from what I remember, are based on submissions from the registries rather than on the zone file data. Jmccormac (talk) 03:31, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]