User talk:Suffusion of Yellow

May I pick your brains?

Hi! I noticed your test page with special characters in the article name, and it seems we're both looking at the same problem. At least, when I use PILT (my version of Lupin's AVT) I have, um, certain difficulties with such articles. Did you come to a solution that I might be able to pick up? Philip Trueman (talk) 12:34, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I didn't notice that AVT had a problem, even. I made that page as a preemptive measure to test my own little script. But now that you mention it, I'll look into it (tomorrow, going to bed now). In the meantime, feel free to fill that page with profanity if you want to test your script. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 13:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what that script is intended to do. At a guess, the idea is that when a rollback (in a new window) completes, it'll switch to the user talk page of the vandal, and then add the warning. Yes? Fair enough. In PILT I'm taking a different approach. Now I've got Ajax rollback working, I don't have a rollback window. The long term plan is to intercept my rollbacks in the edit stream (I already do that bit), and use them to trigger talk page opening, or even automagical creation of the warning. Philip Trueman (talk) 12:18, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Yep, that's pretty close to what it does. The "vanarticle" parameter is used by both Twinkle and Friendly, which I use to issue the actual warnings. I took a closer look at your PILT tool and I think I'll try it out tomorrow. To answer your original question, I've found that Lupin's tool is not using EncodeURIComponent() in a lot of places where it should be. See [1] for all the places I've found so far, but I don't think I've found them all yet. It looks like PILT is doing the same thing. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 12:59, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Really me!

Yes, it's really me. See the discussion above. I will request unblock from the other account because I don't want to post my IP address here. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 02:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

{{adminhelp}} I'm currently autoblocked. The autoblock template won't format correctly unless I put in my IP address, and I'm not going to do that. The account that got me autoblocked is User:Suffusion of Yellow&more?, which I created to check if Lupin's recent2.js correctly parses usernames which contain special characters (see the discussion above). I was trying to find the correct template to use for alternate accounts when User:NawlinWiki blocked the alternate account for impersonating me (which I appreciate, by the way!). I posted an unblock request from the other account, and User:Daniel Case put it on hold. I'm not sure that he realizes that this account is autoblocked. I don't know if it's possible to un-auto-block an account without knowing its IP address. If not, please decline this request and I'll take a 24-hour wikibreak. :-)Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 05:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

[2] is your autoblock. Tim Song (talk) 05:59, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

I have removed the autoblock. Keegan (talk) 06:21, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I didn't know that number could be used to unblock. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 06:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Michael Sullivan

I didn't mean to stomp on your edit, you just managed to do the same thing I was trying to do (you just seem to type quicker than I do). I just overwrote yours as I had added some of the awards he won. Vulture19 (talk) 00:13, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem, such things happen. Your edit added more info than mine anyway, so it's all for good. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Admirable

If this is incorrectly formatted or in the wrong place, please forgive. This time, I am not aiming for mischief.

I'm actually a bit fascinated by the regenerative power wiki articles seem to have thanks to those like yourself. I'm wondering if you are paid to do this, or if there are just so many devoted users out there that a happy balance is had.

I maliciously edited (vandalized) two articles tonight and found them both QUICKLY restored and a warning given. I did it because certain referenced people's actions highly offended me, so I meant to vilely slander them as I deemed they deserved all the retribution the world could give. I still believe the latter.

But I also believe in the beauty of truth and accuracy, and I am glad to know my childish efforts have been thwarted. It's good to know that we can count on wikipedia and it's loyal users to protect truth and nurture it.

So... thanks, I guess.

Again, if this is in the wrong place, please, my apologies. Unfortunately, it was not obvious how/where to leave you a message. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.74.240.121 (talk) 06:22, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Inappropriate Image on User Page of Man Ejaculating on Women's Face...

Suffusion of Yellow, Administrators on English Wikipedia are allowing this image to stay on your User Page, Or have they "warned" you? To me it looks like inappropriate for little kids to see that sort of thing... and yes Anyone can use WP. Thank You. --Huik01 (talk) 08:02, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Ohhhh my god, stupid me again sorry Yellow damn IP did it. --Huik01 (talk) 08:03, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I thought you'd figure it out. I added a request to have this image and another one added to the bad image list, so both will only show up in the appropriate articles. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 08:20, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

The user named Zoogom has received 3 warnings of vandalism already and very recently he/she vandalized the article Mexicans by deleting a section and typing in a goof note in it's place, you can see this for yourself in the history of the article. This person appears to just be here for the sole purpose of causing disruption. Just letting you know since I saw that you gave him a final warning on his page.Ocelotl10293 (talk) 22:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

We are having problems with the user Chris Iz Cali. He/she has a record for vandalizing all Mexico related articles by supplanting false information and deleting sections or sources. If you check his history you will see he has been doing this for some time now and has been warned several times to stop his disruptive edits but shows no willingness to stop or cooperate with other editors. I don't know how to report him/her so I'm letting you know since you seem to know how to deal with vandals better than me. Ocelotl10293 (talk) 22:14, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I can't see how that is unambiguous vandalism, though I didn't look too closely. Can you point to one specific edit that is clear vandalism, and explain why? Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 03:51, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Well what he/she is doing is not so much vandalism as it is purposely distorting and manipulating specific information in certain articles to suit his POV. You can see what he/she has been editing in his/her Edit history. His/her agenda is to manipulate the demographics of Mexico-related articles to lower the number, or percentage, of the indigenous peoples and raise the European demographic; that is his/her M.O.. In the article Demographics of Mexico you can see from the revision history how he/she has manipulated the data by augmenting the European demographic and lowering the indigenous statistic. He/she ignores cited sources and adds contradictory information without showing where he got that information from. He/she has a history of doing this and he has already been warned a few times to quit making disruptive edits to other articles. I also believe he is the same person as IP 76.83.2.131 but this is only my speculation because both seem to be following the same pattern in their recent edits. Ocelotl10293 (talk) 04:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I left a note encouraging him/her to discuss the subject on the article's talk page. Hopefully he/she will do so. Note that if something "is not so much vandalism" it's best not to call it that. POV-pushing is a serious problem, but it's not necessarily vandalism unless it involves the deliberate insertion of falsehoods or any of the other things listed here. Without reading the user's mind, I don't know if they removed the source in a deliberate attempt to be disruptive, but the blank edit summaries certainly did not help them in the matter. Hence the encouragement to use the talk page. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 05:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Well I hope this person listens and uses the talk page rather than making disruptive edits. Thanks for the help and advice. Ocelotl10293 (talk) 05:47, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Paradox Valley

On January 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Paradox Valley, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

Re your message: No problem. Sometimes a welcome and a single warning works and sometimes it doesn't. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Jane Austen

Oops! Very sorry: I reverted the wrong edit when I saw this silly sentence appear on my watchlist (didn't realize he had reverted it himself). --Azurfrog (talk) 08:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it; I'm sure I've done the same thing myself on occasion. Happy editing! Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 08:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

2010 Haiti Earthquake

I had to cut and paste, because the page already existed, unless there is another way? Dusti^SPEAK!! 01:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, tag the intended target of the move with {{db-move|PAGE TO BE MOVED HERE|REASON FOR MOVE}}, and assuming there was never any content on the target and the move in uncontroversial, an admin will delete it for you. However, while I can't find the relevant section of the MOS right now, based on 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake, I think the original title was correct. If I'm wrong about that, this discussion should probably continue to the article's talk page, though. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 01:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

That may be true. I was going on the fact that it is the title of an event, and as such, each significant word should be capitalized. I could be wrong though? Dusti^SPEAK!! 01:38, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

It's not a proper noun, so should be lower case CTJF83 chat 01:42, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:

Yeah no worries. Hmm your userpage seems to be a prominent target for vandals. -Reconsider!

Thank you

Just wanted to say thanks again for correcting the title of Today Was a Fairytale... had I known that it wouldn't be capitalized when I added it, I'd have let someone more experienced do it! The Mach Turtle (talk) 04:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert on my userpage. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:37, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 02:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello

We may never know the real ethnography of Mexico since the Mexican gov't does not have a racial census. However, most statistics on this subject are estimates/educated guesses. I say the CIA world factbbook is wrong because it has old sources dating back to 1999 and 2004. The statistics/estimates for the ethnography of Mexico by the CIA is about 20 years old, about when the illegal immigration began. By that time, the demographics might have changed, and the 1990s also brought many white Latin Americans such as the Argentines. This is just my point of view, I am sorry if I have edited perhaps inapporpriately. But I just cannot see the Natives respresenting such a huge chunk of the Mexican population. Especially since most immigration to USA by Mexicans has been by Native and mestizo Mexicans, since all statistics show that they are the poorest in Mexico, whites would not go as illegals, or else the US popular media would picture illegals as white, and not brown (as they always do). The reason they are poor may be the effects of social racism, corruptness, the effects of the old caste system, or any combination of these three. If many mestizos and Natives are leaving Mexico and many whites (such as Argentines) are taking their place, then wouldn't you say that it is only logical for mestizo and Native populations to have shrunk (at least a little)?--Chris Iz Cali (talk) 01:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I say we find more sources and stop relying wholly on the CIA world factbook.--Chris Iz Cali (talk) 01:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Touché

I've restored the deletion template to MEOW. You can speedy it if you like. I thought that, with 7 million google hits, it wouldn't get deleted :P. Allformweek (talk) 23:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 23:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Janeane Garofalo

No, I did not, I'm going to assume that it was some sort of edit conflict between myself using Huggle and the current revision using Twinkle, not sure specifically what happened. Thanks for the tip on the auto signing, I will do that. Also, not sure what you mean when you say that people frown on signatures like mine. Can you clarify? Thanks, cheers. petiatil ^»speak 09:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petiatil (talk • contribs)

I see, thank you, I was unaware, I will correct that immediately. petiatil ^»speak 09:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petiatil (talk • contribs)

There, I hope I've got it now. Ha! Thanks again, I appreciate editors like you who are quick to point out mistakes like these. petiatil ^»speak 09:34, 31 January 2010 (UTC)