User talk:Kralizec!/Archive 2010

Please either start a new section or add your message to the bottom of this page. Unless otherwise specified, I will generally respond on your talk page.

User talk:Kralizec!	→ 2005	→ 2006	→ 2007	→ 2008	→ 2009	→ 2010	→ 2021	← present

Talkback sink

Please drop all {{talkback}} type messages (aka "I have responded to your message on my own talk page") in this section. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 23:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

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

I have replied again.

Userfy Daybreak (folk) Request

Hi, I saw you listed here. Could you please userfy the deleted Daybreak (folk) for me? I need to add the notability info that would have kept if from being deleted in the first place. If it doesn't go there automagically, User:J Clear/Daybreak (folk) seems like a good place to put it. Thanks. --J Clear (talk) 00:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Now where did that stack of round tuits get to? --J Clear (talk) 16:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

What happens with the old edit history? Unrecoverable? Magically comes back when moved to (Article) space? Wait until you recover it, too? Sorry if I'm being a pest, but this is my first attempted resurrection. --J Clear (talk) 16:23, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! I will definitely holler with questions. In the meantime, could you also look at two other Oklahoma artists? One is TIMOTHY LONG and the other M.J. ALEXANDER. I also have many more to do and appreciate feedback.

Thanks again,

BLACKMESADANCERZ

P.S. Please forgive my lack of wikistyle...

Blackmesadancerz (talk) 18:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)

The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for your help with the anonIP "men" astronaut vandals! Doniago (talk) 16:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Jim Irwin article

Ah, I just read the article, I didn't see any explicit vandelism, why is it locked?--Abebenjoe (talk) 17:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for clearing that up. I was wondering what was happening to the articles that dealt with Apollo 15's crew. Thank you for being vigilant on this.--Abebenjoe (talk) 18:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Soxpertise

Hello, Kralizec!. You have new messages at MBK004's talk page.
Message added 01:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your sockpuppet expertise is needed... -MBK₀₀₄ 01:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Its not over, and it never will be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.233.215.214 (talk) 05:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Kralizec!. You have new messages at MBK004's talk page.
Message added 02:18, 23 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-MBK₀₀₄ 02:18, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

This looks lovely: Kral!zec- (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) needless to say I have blocked indefinitely for block evasion as well as impersonation of you. Another CU might be in order. -MBK₀₀₄ 03:37, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Bethel Church, Mansfield Woodhouse protection

Thank you for your prompt attention to my request for protection for this article. I am, however, wondering why it didn't get full protection as requested. I've been watching this article for years, seen it go through many changes, and it has been under constant attack from vandals. Semi-protecting it for 10 days isn't going to stop them, unfortunately. I know it isn't a very important article in the grand scheme of things, it isn't The Red Sox or anything, but it's important to me, and to many other people whose lives have been touched, damaged, ruined, even, by these churches. That the article stays intact is so important, and only full protection can guarantee that. Anyway, thank you for locking it up so quickly! o0pandora0o (talk) 23:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Is it then possible to have permanent semi-protection? Keep the anonymous vandals and the non-autoconfirmed from being able to edit? Because they won't give up, they will come back. 82.2.31.240 and 81.138.10.158 have already proven that they will come back after one semi-protect to vandalize. It's possible that, given that their IP addresses are in the UK, and close to the location of Bethel, they may be current members vandalizing with a purpose. So.. Is permanent semi-protection possible? -o0pandora0o (talk) 09:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok, good deal. Thank you for your patience and time! :) o0pandora0o (talk) 16:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

• Hello again! Looks like they're going to bring up the "Tyre" crap again. The article was written in such a way so that the whole Tyre shop/Tire shop argument could be put to bed. It was hashed out and settled way back in the archives. I don't know if you want to wait and see if they do it again, but last time they went after the article trying to add Tyre in, they kept at it. I know it's just a tiny little niggling thing, but it had been decided upon and finished when Cirt finished the article... Thanks!! o0pandora0o (talk) 15:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

• Yeah, they did it again today. o0pandora0o (talk) 19:24, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi there! I want to edit religion of Serbs in the right box

I think it should be:

Serbian Orthodox, Roman Catholic (mostly in Dalmatia and Slavonia in present-day Croatia), Muslim (mostly in Raska and Bosnia and Herzegovina), Atheism

Since it is the truth, although today they are mostly declared Croats and Bosniaks, it is not true that they are not Serbs. It is the non-recognition of them as Serbs by Orhodox Serbs which led to their seccesion from their Serbian identity, and the subsequent loss of Serb territory including Dubrovnik, large chuncks of BiH, parts of Kosovo, as they assimilated into Albanians, instead being of Muslim Serbs, which they were.

Also, there is an Atheist population among Serbs, which is about equal to Catholics and Muslims in Serbia separate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zelja87 (talk • contribs) 08:33, 17 January 2010

Thank you for the message you left on my talk page [1]. Unfortunately given the massive amounts of edit warring and POV-pushing that have happened at the Serbs article, I must decline to lift the page protection early. However if you would like to see something changed, you should feel free to bring it up for discussion on the article's talk page. That said, please note that as per official Wikipedia policy, "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." Regards, — Kralizec! (talk) 15:07, 17 January 2010 (UTC) (original reply [2] copied from User talk:Zelja87)

Re: Jay Chou

Sorry for making a threat to that page and person, and i understand i had mistaken about JeremyA. --Frontier95 (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Meerkat Manor: The Story Begins

As soon as the unprotection was lifted, it started getting hit again :( -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Will you stop back by here and see if you feel protection should be returned? Thanks. Beach drifter (talk) 18:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

And you are...?

One would presume you're the ghost of User:William M. Connolley!  : |

1. PERSISTENT disruptive editing? PERSISTENT? (OK, you're probably not Connolley's ghost, because he wasn't that nonsensical.)

2. NO opportunity to appeal the block?

3. NO opportunity to make a comment at the IP-address page?

Dude, zealous prosecution and lax judgment make for piss-poor Wiki-justice. Put down the gavel and hang up the robe. Because you belong down at the end of the bench (by the water cooler).

68.50.128.120 (talk) 00:34, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Random SPI clerk

Hi, sorry, not sure if I formatted the report correctly on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikiuser999120 or added it to WP:SPI right... do you think you could take a quick look? Thanks! ╟─TreasuryTag►sheriff─╢ 12:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Spitfire (talk · contribs) assisted me in the end... thanks for your attention, though! ╟─TreasuryTag►duumvirate─╢ 17:27, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

No, genuinely, not to worry, it's all fine now! The account in question pleaded WP:BROTHER (groan) which simplified things rather...! ╟─TreasuryTag►Africa, Asia and the UN─╢ 19:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion close

Hi again. As you are an administrator, I was wondering if you could act as a neutral party and close the move discussion at Talk:Fushigi Yūgi#Requested move, since if the consensus is to move, it would require an administrator to perform it? Thanks, -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 14:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

User

Please review User:Ajraddatz for repeated vandalism from User talk:65.39.66.203, a previously warned user IP. Red3biggs (talk) 00:20, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up; I went ahead and blocked the IP for a week. — Kralizec! (talk) 14:19, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Watch Yourself

What you reap, you will also sow..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.18.232.168 (talk) 16:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

My worthy opponent, Since you have repeatedly disrupted my logical edits you leave me no choice. Since you have seemed to block the astronaut pages for a month, then I will resort to better methods of editing so that the most acurate truth can be told. It doesn't matter how much you edit Kralizec, I will always be here, and I have found my next series of articles to fix. Before this is over you will have to completely lock those from ALL editing if you don't want them "tampered with", or perhaps you will be banned..... 130.18.232.179 (talk) 19:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)Not Gayle Nuffer

Indeed. Meet my friend WP:RBI. — Kralizec! (talk) 19:37, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Favour?

Hey there, How's things, hope yer OK? I've been out of touch with admin duties for quite a time, having been only keeping my eye on the CERN and LHC issues. Could you have a look at the contributions of User:Ironboy11, he created a poorly worded category, but looking through hi contributions, I'm seeing a few unusual re-direct moves, like something is trying to be covered up. Could you have a look as I can't suss it out please? Many thanks. ^Khukri 07:06, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Mborromeo

I have unblocked Mborromeo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I have come to the conclusion that he was editing in good faith. He appears to be capable of doing good editing if he is patient. Please assist him in any way you can. Fred Talk 17:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Abu Kalam Azad

Good evening dear Kralizec,

I want to complain about some Users who vandalize many articles on Wikipedia and push their own POV´s on them. Some of them are Users like User:Ketabtoon who begin to edite all articles that is somehow related with Afghanistan, it´s people or culture, despite he has no knowledge about Afghanistan and it´s history. If you look on his contributions, you will see that he is always pushing unsourced and unreliable datas on articles and delete scientific and reliable sources, mostly scholarely. Be it about Ghurids, Persian language, Afghanistan, Ghaznavids or Tajiks and many more. He corrupts many articles which is a break of Wikipedia´s law (f.ex. here 1 or 2, 3 only three of many hundred of examples). He was many times reported but somewho he still occur on Wikipedia, although all his edites were banned by many Admins. The further point is, that he is known for beeing an ultra-nationalist Pashtun from Pakistan, who do not accept western, mostly scholaric and objective sources, except sources were terms like Afghan are used, so he can jump up and use it in a wrong context. For example as for Ghaznavids or Ghurids he was keeping the term for Pushtuns, while the term Afghan was used in Britannica for the Tajik people of modern Afghanistan who are also known by the law of Afghanistan as Afghans. He makes use of this point to claim and falsify all articles about culture, history, languages, countries etc. I ask you, as a member of the Admin-Team of Wikipedia and as a represant who is doing this job to provide the world the knowledge it needs, to do something against him. He and the User:119.73.4.199 (who is a banned User and a sock of many banned accounts; User:Khampalak, User:NisarKand etc.) are known for working with eachother. All edites of both Users are not only similar, but to 100% exactly the same, the kind of their writings and the kind how they push their POV´s and even the choise of their not reliable sources. As I mentioned they work together...or User:Ketabtoon is a sockpuppet of NisarKand, User:Khampalak etc. Wikipedia would be exonarated when the Admins would block and ban them from editing. As long Wikipedia accept them, articles will turn to slippery goods on Wikipedia and lose their accurate values.

For ca. 1 year ago, I was reading an article about Abul Kalam Azad, an Indian Muslim politician of Tajik origine. However, the article was using the term Afghan to tie him with Afghanistan, since his ancestors were from Herat, Afghanistan, a Persian/Tajik city. I was looking for sources on library and on the Net to exchange the term Afghan with Perian (Tajik). When I found them, I used a few of them. But some days later, the article was falsified by the User:119.73.4.199 and User:Ketabtoon from Persian to Pashtun, but not even back to Afghan (see on the state definition of Afghan, citizen), as you can see here. He claimed that the term Afghan mean Pashtuns and not Tajik. He did not want to understand the term was used to tie him with Afghanistan, as Britannica and other not scientific and reliable sources do, when it comes to regional heritage or origine of someone or something. For Abul Kalam Azad, I had the following sources where it was stated the person´s Persian origine:

http://www.bharatadesam.com/people/biographies/freedom_fighters/maulana_abul_kalam_azad.php

1. India Wins Freedom; Orient Longman Book-Institute
2. ^ Die politische Willensbildung in Indien 1900-1960; 1965, von Dietmar Rothermund
3. ^ http://www.whereincity.com/india/great-indians/freedom-fighters/maulana-abul-kalam.php His mother was an Arab and the daughter of Sheikh Mohammad Zaher Watri and his father, Maulana Khairuddin, was a Bengali Muslim of Afghan (Tajik) origine. Khairuddin left India during the Sepoy Mutiny, proceeded to Mecca and settled there. He came back to Calcutta

The last source give in addition to the term Afghan as someone who comes from modern-day Afghanistan, his national ethnicity. But it is even interesting to see that User:Ketabtoon uses the same sources that grip on his Tajik ancestory for his Pashtun origine click here. They just jump over the sources and the sourced terms and exchange them with no opponent sources. I want to ask you, if you can give me the permission to correct the falsified paragraph in the article. I appreciate every help from your side. I am going to create an account for myself on Wikipedia and I would thank you very much if I could stand near to you. With best regards, dear friend--94.219.218.209 (talk) 23:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

TL;DR — Kralizec! (talk) 15:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The Rico402 swindler-boy

This teenager swindler alias "Rico402" uses the identity of an other existing person. It is crime in every countries. This boy doesn't know the very basics of electricity. Please don't support the crime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.143.2 (talk) 19:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't know why banned user Celebration1981 chose to trash me on this Talk page (using yet another IP to sock), but here he is. Why he thinks I'm using "the identity of an other existing person" is beyond me. I had an ongoing dialog with him for over a year -- originally as Stears81 (08-08-10 to 08-11-21) and various anon IPs -- before he was finally banned for violations too numerous too mention. Since then he's been using a string of anon IPs to sock, requiring admins to protect various articles. I invite you delete the above post and my reply at your discretion. Cheers, Rico402 (talk) 04:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Surely THIS can't be acceptable: "User:Anti-rico"!! Talk about personal attacks. Rico402 (talk) 05:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Resolved ("indefinitely blocked") by Rdm2376. Cheers, Rico402 (talk) 06:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Mariah Carey discography

Can you please semi-protect the singles one too please, annoying vandalism by Ip's!. Also can you not permanently semi-protect them because it was semi-protected before the discography split. Jayy008 (talk) 15:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. However next time I might suggest making a separate request at WP:RFPP, rather than putting multiple requests in the same line. — Kralizec! (talk) 00:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Personal request

Would you mind fully protecting my talk page for a few hours or so? I've asked another admin to stop posting there several times and it's getting out of hand. Toddst1 (talk) 23:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I would like to, but fear it would not be an appropriate use of my tools. However if I could make an alternative suggestion ... log out for the rest of the day and enjoy a walk in a local park. When WikiDrama starts to drive me nuts, I do this myself and find that it works wonders for putting things into perspective. Good luck! — Kralizec! (talk) 00:08, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Queen (band)

Hi. Why did you semi-protect the Queen (band) article? I see there was a request from Will1i6am, a new user who hasn't actually contributed to this article. But there is no recent vandalism of any significance on the article. There has been heavy editing of late, and a few differences in opinion, but certainly nothing that you could call vandalism or even edit warring. But consensus is being attained and overall edits have been constructive.

It makes little difference to me, but I can't help wondering what motivated this user to request protection on a page that doesn't have a problem. Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Charvet

I wrote several times to Racconish telling him that his reference to Hugo Chavez ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Charvet_customers ), President of the Republica Bolivariana de Venezuela, is based on false information, as appeared in an obscure Peruvian newspaper ( http://www.elregionalpiura.com.pe/editoriales/opiniones/miguelgodos/art_2006/godos_gorila.htm ). This article is defamatory and should't be used as a reference in Wikipedia.

This article about Charvet customers was proposed for deletion on November 2008 for beign not encyclopedic.

This article is being used right now (January 2010) for attacking President Chavez. An article in Wikipedia cannot use references with defamatory information.

As stated in Wikipedia:

"Wikipedia is a high-profile, widely viewed website with an international scope, which means that material we publish about living people can seriously affect their lives and the lives of their families, colleagues, and friends. Biographical material must therefore be written with great care and strict adherence to our content policies ...

Criticism and praise of the subject should be represented if it is relevant to the subject's notability and can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to take sides; it needs to be presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone...

Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable third-party sources, it may include original research and unverifiable statements, and could lead to libel claims.

Material available solely in questionable sources or sources of dubious value should not be used anywhere in the article, including in "Further reading" or "External links" sections...

Avoid repeating gossip. Ask yourself whether the source is reliable; whether the material is being presented as true; and whether, even if true, it is relevant to an encyclopedia article about the subject. When less-than-reliable publications print material they suspect is untrue, they often include weasel phrases and attributions to anonymous sources. "

I think these rules support my objections about this reference to President Hugo Chavez.

Odalcet (talk) 03:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Discussed here. Racconish ^Tk 17:16, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

seven wonders of the world

What is it about that article which draws such weird edits? It must get assigned in school classes a lot ... - DavidWBrooks (talk) 15:12, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Seven Wonders of the Ancient World revert query - sorry - my mistake. I was tired and was reverting a whole lot of vandalism by an unregistered user. Vernon White ^{. . . Talk} 17:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Can you help with photos?

Could you help to illustrate National Register of Historic Places listings in Lucas County, Ohio? We at WP:NRHP need badly pictures for the Toledo area (including outside Lucas County), and I (as the only project member in western Ohio) have no chance to get up to the Toledo area. Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 01:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, except for Henry County (it has just four sites, all of which I got in September; it was the only trip I've ever taken to Henry, Fulton, or Williams counties), all the Toledo metropolitan area counties are lacking plenty of pictures. There's nothing specific that I'd like to ask you to photograph; it's just a request to consider getting pictures for any and every site when you have the chance. I'd guessed that you were in Lucas County after seeing your comment at WP:AN about the NPR predictions of Wikipedia becoming too big, at which you remarked about WGTE-FM being your local public radio; I guessed Lucas County simply because its population is so much larger than that of any surrounding county. Thanks for the reply! Nyttend (talk) 23:22, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)

The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Redirect

Hello K, I'm a bit uncertain about the dos and don'ts of redirect and I'm just curious about something here → is this kind of redirect allowed~? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 02:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Generally speaking, Cross-namespace redirects are frowned upon, and often get deleted as per WP:R#DELETE. Personally I tend not to get very excited about them, especially since it looks like the editor in question had been doing article development in his or her namespace [3]. Please let me know if you have any other questions or issues. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 02:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for sorting the whole messy details for me, I understand it better now. And no, I do not see any problem with the editor in question, only just curious about the strange redirect. If it was really an issue, I would tell him/her nicely about the potential problem of it all. Cheers~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 03:00, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Delete an article

Hello,

I would like to candidate or to add to speed deletion an article under the name "Vojvodina Academy of Sciences and Arts" because there is a complete article about this matter under a name "VANU-Vojvodinian academy of sciences and art" and there is no need for both to exist. Thank you in advance. Greetings iadrian (talk) 20:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Re

LOL. Maybe popular with the vandals. Not the type of attraction I would want ;) --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 05:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Possible vandalism

Hello, can you tell me please how can i report a user that makes inaccurate edits even if there are many references and sources that say otherwise ? And none that supports his point of view. Thank you.

The article i am talking abut is VANU(Vojvodinian academy of sciences and art) , i am having some kind of an edit war with one user. Can you please review the situation and take the necessary action. I don`t know if it is my or his fault, i just want this problem to be solved because i put some effort in creating this page and i don`t want the first person who comes to ruin it without any sources or proof of any kind while ignoring all the sources and references i presented on the article.

If not, please tell me how to solve this kind of problems.Thank you in advance. iadrian (talk) 13:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

New Wikipedia

Hi Kralizec

I am contributing in the running test Wikipedia of Tarifit Berber [4], my question is: Is there any section in Wikipedia where I can learn advanced editing of Wikipedia pages (tables, colors, alignment, fonts)?

Thanks

--Ayt Buyafar (talk) 19:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

thanks

thanks man. --Ayt Buyafar (talk) 20:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Goten

Goten real World Content

-In music, the song "Chīsa na Senshi~Goten to Trunks no Theme~" by Shin Oya focuses on both Trunks and Goten.

-Appearnce as Playble character (Jump stars series)

-Appearance in japenese school supply commercials

Main character

-Majin buu

-Frieza

-Cell

All three of these character have only made one saga appearnces an are main character? wrong Goten has Been through mulitple sagas an actual series through DBZ an DBGT an is a Primary Character of Dragonball series. an has far more important parts then any of the 3 characters above, an is also the only character in the DB series to be on the cover of Dezinshuu alone (Besides Goku)

Necessary Changes

-Goten - Article- Help me out

-Goten main character- place Goten in Main characters, an remove secondary characters like cell an majinbuu

Hey my name is sal an i was wondering if you could help me out with this

(Salito149 (talk) 16:16, 14 February 2010 (UTC))

Bigfoot

Hello - can you send me to some of the bigfoot protection history? I really need to see. I have nothing better to do. Is there a protection log? - I don't know how see such a log. I do see that over 500 people have bigfoot on their watch list. Thanks! 99.150.255.75 (talk) 20:15, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Extremly Bad Language and Racism

Hi Fellow editor, I have issued this warning, here. I have lifted the language from his comments. This is really really bad language and extremly racist, in the Punjabi language. I feel somewhat embarrassed that a fellow Punjabi has used such language. I recommend that this user be reported to the University of Washington, where this originates. Such racism should not be tolerated. Thanks --Sikh-History 17:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

BL 8 inch Mk VIII naval gun

Thank you for the kind words about my article. I appreciate your dedication to Wikipedia by undertaking administrator responsibilities.Thewellman (talk) 19:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

fyi

User talk:162.129.251.18 (whom you had just blocked) is at it again.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

and again.--Epeefleche (talk) 09:45, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks like another admin blocked the IP while I was off the past couple of days. Please let me know if you run into any other issues with this anonymous editor. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 20:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Return of sockpuppets?

I see you must get hundreds of such reports, but it appears another sockpuppet may have appeared, this time one of Msa1701 (talk · contribs). I've explained in a little more detail here, if you wanted to give your opinion? Benea (talk) 14:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Bethel Church Article again

Hello again. The Bethel Church article is being tweaked again. Back when Cirt was writing it, there was discussion about one of the pastors in Connecticut's business, Sam Wibberley Tire. Cirt had originally wrote that Sam owned a tire shop, and someone came along and changed it to tyre, in keeping with the UK spelling. After some discussion, Cirt ended up just writing that Sam owned a business named Sam Wibberley Tire, and left it at that. Since then, people had been coming in and adding in that it was a tyre business. Up until you put the semi-protect on, I had been taking the "tyre" back out. And now there is Qaysie who is putting "tyre" back in. I've been taking it back out, but jeez. It was all hashed out, back on the Discussion page, which is now in the archives. I don't know. Can we block Qaysie, or warn them, or something? o0pandora0o (talk) 02:46, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Now there's Donald VX pulling the same shenanigans. He was doing this before you had put the semi-protect on. o0pandora0o (talk) 06:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I, FDJoshua22, award you this barnstar for preventing vandalisms at the article The 39 Clues. Keep up the good work! FDJoshua22 (talk) 09:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Mandelson

Hi, lots of vandalism at the mandy article and the election is coming up there is only going to be more partisan vandalism, would you extent the semi protection for another month or even two please as that will keep it stable. Off2riorob (talk) 01:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Transformation fetish

I don't particularly disapprove of the protection, but this article was not subject to vandalism - I think edit warring is a more appropriate term. Both sides appear to be acting in good faith to try and improve Wikipedia, they just have differing views on what "improvement" is. GreenReaper (talk) 01:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Legal

With all respect, I, and other OTRS agents (volunteer email response team members) which answer emails to that address have expressed that we emphatically do not want those types of emails, nor are we equipped to handle in the way that template encourages them. It is difficult to see how the consensus driven process can effectively determine what type of emails we can or want to handle. You might not define it as urgent, but the queues are made larger by emails that we really don't desire, for reasons specified on that talk page. I don't understand how this is hard? Warm regards, NonvocalScream (talk) 05:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)