User talk:Daedalus969

8:12 am, 8 September 2024 (PDT)

Welcome to my talk page! I will reply on your talk page unless you prefer otherwise as usually noted on your talk page. If you are an anonymous editor, I will reply here. When leaving messages, please remember these easy steps: Use a descriptive subject/headline Use [[wikilinks]] when mentioning users and pages If you are continuing a conversation with me, please edit the relevant section instead of starting a new section Sign your post with four tildes ~~~~ to leave your name and date Please also note that I have a problem with dropping things, but I am working on it, and have made progress. If you are going to use {{talkback}} templates, date them, so they can be archived properly. Click here to leave me a message

Happy New Year

Dear Daedalus969,
I just wanted to wish you and your family a HAPPY NEW YEAR. Cheers, and happy editing in 2010.Malke2010

Caution

Please refrain from writing uncivil and shouting messages on my talk page. If you do that again you will be reported to the appropriate administrator's board. Also, please don't bother replying to this caution. Thank you. Amsaim (talk)

Re Jim Bell

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at EyeSerene's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

User:SyedNaqvi90 blocked?

According to your edits here, User:SyedNaqvi90 was indef-blocked for sockpuppetry. According to his block log, that doesn't seem to be the case, and when the sockpuppetry investigation was closed, SyedNaqvi90 was to be warned, not indef-blocked. Am I misunderstanding the message on his userpage, or is it simply wrong? Huon (talk) 13:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

It's wrong. He probably should have been blocked for at least a week as a sockmaster, but for whatever reason the admins dealing with his case elected not to do so and just blocked the socks. He is currently caught in an autoblock on his ip address so he's getting at least a day off. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

My bad. Sorry for any upset caused.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 19:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy Notice

As a courtesy, Radiopathy has mentioned you here [1]. Dayewalker (talk) 15:53, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

"Massive template breakage"

Hi Daedalus,
just as some feedback to WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Massive template breakage, I presume you used IRC to organize the rollback of the uw-* templates? I would suggest that you go straight to ANI next time, that would have had a much higher chance to determine that there wasn't actually anything wrong with the warning templates. IRC has advantages, but escalating issues should happen on-wiki for several reasons.
Cheers, Amalthea 16:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010

• Book review: Review of The World and Wikipedia

• News and notes: iPhone app update, Vector rollout for May 13, brief news

• In the news: Government promotes Tamil Wikipedia, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject U.S. Roads

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 14:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

info please

Hi Daedulus, thanks for the comment. Hope that ends that pesky problem. Do you know how to change out an info box? I want to change out a scientist box for one that will allow the addition of mentioning the subject's religion. Thanks.Malke2010 15:28, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

On this page: [2].Malke2010 15:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Drop the stick and move on. You aren't going to make this editor do what you want by harassing them on their talk page. If you have a problem, seek DR. --Daedalus969

Hi, Daedalus969! Are you expresssing your intent to involve yourself in our discussion? If you are, you should probably be brought up to speed so that you can comment productively. First, "discussion" is an early step in dispute resolution. You are welcome to join our discussion, if your goal is to be helpful. Second, I have no intention of "making anyone do what I want"; however, we have been discussing what Malke shouldn't do as a Wikipedia editor. There are specific rules against commenting about editors, and not the content, on article talk pages; and against editing other people's comments, especially without leaving an in-line notation indicating the alteration.

As for his snarky comments about me on his talk page, he's welcome to rant about me there all he wants. It's rather tame banter, actually, and he's probably just venting a bit after we found each other on opposite sides of an editing disagreement back in March, and his edits weren't maintained. If, by your comment, you were suggesting that we escalate this matter to the noticeboards, I was hoping to spare him that. Any helpful comments from you would be appreciated. (I replied here, instead of on his talk page, as my comments are less likely to be altered.) Best regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 18:10, 7 May 2010 (UTC)