User talk:Rjd0060

Please leave new messages at the bottom of the page.
I will usually reply to messages left here on this page so check back for a response.

---

Archives /Archives for a full archive

comment

Okay, I just replied to the one he left me. Hope that isn't a problem?--WillC 03:13, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'm just that kind of person who feels compelled too most of the time. I would rather reply than act like a dick by not. No offense incase you took any. I wasn't trying too it just the way I wrote that sentence I didn't want anyone to think I was being a smart ass.--WillC 03:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Bob Lonsberry article

Hi, Rjd0060. Could I convince you to restore the Bob Lonsberry article? I'm confident I can find some sources to alleviate the concern under which it was PRODded. Thanks! Powers ^T 18:50, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks. Powers ^T 20:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

ACC

Ay, quick question. I think you were already asked, but I will go into detail. I could not find out who created this account, I was wondering if you knew how to track it down. It was requested through ACC, but was already created when I looked at the case. The ACC Log tells me Nja247 (talk · contribs) created the account, but when I look at wiki logs I do not see that.

• Calvinthekillerthai created 00:56, 13 November 2008[1]
• Nja247's latest account creation 08:21, 12 November 2008[2]

Do you know how I can see who actually created the account? Thank you for your time, MatthewYeager 01:23, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Gottcha, I guess that makes sense. Thank you for your time :D MatthewYeager 01:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I can confirm I had intended to create the account, but was unable to as the server told me it was already in use. I meant to go into ACC and change it from created to taken, but had some minor ISP issues until now. That user is definitely an issue. Sorry, though of course I didn't know :/ Nja247 (talk • contribs) 01:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

You Tube links

Commented out , not removed. I was planning on rolling those back anyway, following a disscussion in the IRC channel. Thanks :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:30, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Media linkage (policy) outside of Main space

Ok following your comments, Can I thusly safely assume that except in the case of blindlingly obvious copyvio, that WP:EL, and WP:ELNEVER onyl apply to article namespace?

Assistance in scanning links in Article space for copyvio would however be appreciated. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Sodom

Ok, first off, how are you going to use evidence, which to your acknowlegement, doesn't even exist? Oh, ok it just "happens" to be deleted but you provide it anyways as proof of something I supposedly did, according to you and several moderators who I've never heard of before.

Second of all, am I not entitled to defend myself? Isn't that the whole point of the Unblock request? But nobody wants to hear anything I say, my requests have been tossed aside and I've been quickly muzzled by each and everyone of you, I'm trying to explain to you people that I DID NOT DO WHAT YOU'RE ACUSSING ME OF. Yet every attempt I make at explaining this, you guys extend my block, in an attempt to silence me. What kind of 3-ring Facist Show are you running here? Well just so you know, I won't be silent. I'm going right up the ladder with this, I'm going to find out who's in charge, and I'm going to let him know what you people are doing to innocent Wikipedia members. Good day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.134.109.84 (talk) 03:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Question about my handling of suspicious multiple account requests. (WP:ACC)

Dear Rjd0060: I wanted to ask you about my handling of a situation involving multiple account requests in a suspicious way. I am unsure as to whether how I handled the requests was proper and was hoping you could advise me and tell me if my reasoning was sound. I am referring to requests 16537, created by me, and 16536, created by another accountcreator. I noticed both of these requests came in right in a row, from the same IP, but from email addresses that were different but only slightly so. It had the feel of an abusive attempt to create multiple accounts, whether as sockpuppets or to later vandalize with I could not say, but it also could have been nothing. I, of course, also wanted to assume good faith. One of the accounts had already been created. I realized that, if the effort was abusive I could create the account but still short circuit the abuse by linking the accounts with a template or talk page message, and figured if the user was legit such a thing would do no harm. So, I created the second account and left a message on both talk pages linking the accounts. The note said nothing more than that the accounts were closely related. (Diffs [3], [4].) While I gave out no privileged information, I find myself concerned that I may have gone too far with even what I did do. Did I? If so, what do you think I should have done? ⇔ ∫Æ_S dt @ 11:55, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

You Tube links..

OK - I note that you reviewed a couple of User space You Tube removals recently, Would you be willing to assist in reinstatment of the ones contained here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Sfan00+IMG&namespace=2&year=&month=-1

This is non trival owing to intermediate edits. and the fact that I am needing edits to be approved at present. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Request to restore Judicial Shamanism article

Hallo Ryan, I'd like to request to restore this article. It is quite unfaire that someone can delete an article without giving a reason. You wrote "The cited sources don't use this term." - THIS IS NONSENSE. Do you what to say that professor Jean Baudrillard does not use the word "shamanism"? Ryan, did you ever read anything of Jean Baudrillard? No, you did not. Do you want to say that professor Rodell does not use term "high-class mumbo-jumbo"? Yes, he does. Do you want to say that professor Pierre Legendre does not use term of "shamanism" in the book "Le desir politique de Dieu"? Ryan, did you ever hold this book in your hands before writing this? No, you did not. Concerning professor Duncan Kennedy from Harvard - of course he uses this term. I do not think that you would ever read anything of professor Duncan Kennedy. For more information visit the British Library http://direct.bl.uk/bld/PlaceOrder.do?UIN=211909788&ETOC=RN&from=searchengine , read the paper of professor Rolandas Pavilionis http://www.paksas.lt/ci.admin/Editor/assets/Tauta_03.pdf , take a look at the abstracts of the World Congress of Philosophy of Law http://www.law.uj.edu.pl/ivr2007/Abstracts_SW.pdf Do not administrate topics that you are not able to understand. Do you speak French? Do you have a law degree and did you ever heard anything about "legal realism"? Yours, LegalRealism —Preceding unsigned comment added by LegalRealism (talk • contribs) 22:23, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Zoot

You have placed a warning on my talk page. Why?
Have you placed a warning on the other users talk page?
Why not?
Pdfpdf (talk) 03:58, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I placed a warning on your page because you are disruptively edit warring. And yes, I placed one on the other users page also. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply.

I have repeatedly tried to engage the other person in discussion, on talk:Zoot, but they refuse to AGF, refuse to discuss the matter, refuse to answer any questions, and refuse to address the issues I raise. Further, there history seems to suggest they enjoy making points and editwarring. His edits are unpredictable and inconsistent, and he chops and changes in his decisions on which parts of the MoS he is going to follow or ignore, and when, and contradicts himself. I am attempting to discuss the matter and address the issues he raises,but don't seem to be having any success. Further, I have made a number of compromises, but he refuses to entertain the idea of compromise. (Or even the idea of discussion, for that matter.)

Relevant pages are:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zoot&action=history
• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Zoot&action=history
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Zoot#Layout
• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sesshomaru&action=history
• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pdfpdf&action=history

I would very much appreciate your advice on how I should proceed with this matter.

With thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but the only advice I can offer is that you pursue Dispute resolution. I do not get involved in editing disputes. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Pdfpdf (talk) 04:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

"I do not get involved in editing disputes." - Very wise of you. (I wish I wasn't involved!) 04:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

User:Locke Cole

I also noticed that the above user was a habitual edit-warrior. Even if he did not edit war at WP:MOSNUM, he certainly did at USS Monitor. I had warned him about it here. Ohconfucius (talk) 06:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Your block of Tony1

Have I missed something? As far as I can see, Tony edited Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) once after MBisanz's warning. How can that be a war..? I've taken the block to WP:ANI, I'd appreciate it if you went there and helped me understand it. Were you perhaps talking about a different page..? Bishonen | talk 18:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC).

Thanks for doing the right thing with the unblock, Rjd ... it's always encouraging to see an admin who is willing to listen. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)