User talk:Black Kite/Archive11

Talk Page archives: 01-02-03-04-05-06-07-08-09-10
To leave me a message, click here

User:71.184.9.231 FYI, I posted a note about WP:ANI about this guy and the mess at the article. Man, I get quite a few nuts here. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC) As someone who is defintiely not a wiki editor pro.....I really respect the great resource that the wiki-volunteers have created. I do use wikipedia quite a bit and always end up using it more than I expected. So thank you! My problem is I do have a strong POV. I'm a libertarian, peace advocating, anti-government, atheist who believes people should have a large amount of individual freedom, even if it means they'll believe and do many many many things I'd never want my children doing. Coincidentally, I believe that much of "official history" is pretty wrong about some of the big issues and that many "conspiracy theories" have some merit. Furthermore, I believe that even if a conspiracy theory seems pretty unlikely, that we shouldn't go around deleting information about the theories or the people that make them. The theories should be confronted, countered, debated etc. Deleting mentions of names and books seems an awfully close intellectual cousin of book burning....so when people learn that Edward Griffins entry has been deleted at wikpedia it is going to raise my blood pressure. It is a fact that "The Creature from Jekyll Island" is a widely read book. It seems that the worst sort of vandalism wiki can encounter is memoryhole deletion tactics....it is censorship....why not jsut go to the discussion page and say your opinion about him being a conspiracy nut or present some scathing crtiques written in the NYT on his book or something? why resort to deletions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabeh73 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC) Hammerandclaw Hi BK, Just a quick note that I appreciate you, and several other admins, stepping in on this. It kind of resolved itself more messily than perhaps necessary, and might have been a little less so if I had known exactly what I was doing from the very beginning. But I did learn alot about how this kind of thing works, and feel much more confident in being able to handle the next one more smoothly. --barneca (talk) 22:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC) Deja vu Hey, this deja vu is giving me a headache. Do you have any insight into how I might relieve the tension in my head? Shoot me an email maybe? --Cheeser1 (talk) 23:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC) Optimus Prime Hey, I realize you are trying to clean up the Optimus Prime article, but surely with an article as big as Optimus Prime, and with him having so many varried forms, more than one picture is justified. Perhaps just a few of his varried forms over the years? Let me know, I don't want to get in trouble here, so maybe we can talk about it. Thanks much in advance for your help. Mathewignash (talk) 23:47, 20 February 2008 (UTC) Thanks for your feedback. I had hoped to get one picture of him from each media/company that he appeared in, but I guess that would be too many. I'll see if I can get a few of the most varried examples. I have several of the toys, so perhaps I can get one picture with several of them in it? That way it would only count as one picture? Mathewignash (talk) 23:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC) I readded SOME of the photos. Current count is the original Optimus Prime has 6 photos, the movie one 2, and the rest 1 or none (there are several different guys named Optimus Prime you know). The original Prime has his box art, one picture from the TV series, and one picture from each of four different comic book companies that have had Transformers titles over the years. Can we keep this while I research some new photos? Mathewignash (talk) 00:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC) The Talk page of Weighted least squares might be kept as is and not redirected? Hello Black Kite. Though I understand that the article Weighted least squares was redirected due to the AfD, I don't at once see the rationale of redirecting the old Talk page as well. For one thing, that leaves no place to put the {{oldafdfull}} template to record the result of the AfD. Would you consider undoing the Talk redirect? EdJohnston (talk) 20:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC) Mr. Deeds Goes to Town Sorry for the intrusion but could you look at this article? A series of anon IPs (same person based on comments) has added an unusual addition under popular culture with no attribution other than his/her viewpoint/OR. Of a more serious nature, the editor has also made inappropriate comments on the article's discussion page and my talk page. Thanks for your assistance. FWIW, I may be asking a number of admins for their review of the article. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC). Blocked a range you've been dealing with I've blocked 118.137.0.0/17 for a week due to the massive amounts of vandlism only edits coming from that range (for example, on the article Sunrise (company)). As you've blocked several of the IPs in this range, I thought you'd want to know. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 00:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC) NFC tagging of Stargate articles You're currently tagging a lot of Stargate articles. I have no problem with that, in fact, I already made a sweep one or two weeks ago in the technology-related SG article-lists, usually only leaving about five images per list (in FAs, five is often considered the upper limit for the number of non-free images). I haven't yet got to the character articles because there was no agreement whatsoever on WT:NFC the last time I checked, especially in the light of the "new" merge-everything encouragement by WP:FICT. Would you explain how many images you consider appropriate so that I can help in cleanup, without getting rid of all images, just so that we're on the same page? – sgeureka t•c 03:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC) I noticed you've recently edited the article on Kosovo. What do you think of this proposal for a change in the history section Talk:Kosovo#PROPOSAL_FOR_THE_HISTORY_SECTION?--Getoar (talk) 04:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC) WP:AN/B Please remove the link in the lead, that goes to the MfD. it was deleted/redirected for a reason. this is just more harassment. βcommand 21:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC) ANI notice As I said over on the AN subpage, the ANI thread is here. Carcharoth (talk) 09:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC) WP:AIV My mistake.. Was just about to revert when I saw that he was last warned on the 20th, not today. Thanks for keeping an eye out though, and keep up the good work! - Milk's Favorite Cookie 23:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC) Jon Hobynx likely reincarnation of R:128.40.76.3 et al Could you review this? WP:ANI#Jon Hobynx likely reincarnation of R:128.40.76.3 et al. You blocked at least one of the other socks; [1]. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC) Request After my this edit AlasdairGreen27 and Ashwinosoft insist on edit warring in national sport. I posted comments in talks of both these editors but they ignore consensus and mediation!!!! AlasdairGreen27 removes a statement, citing 3 sports considered Australian national sports, proposed by himself and voted by me too in mediation: is it a provocation or vandalism? I request your edit in this article or your action against this form of vandalism!!!! Regards,--PIO (talk) 11:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC) Sockpuppet User:JackQPR Hi, sorry to put this on you, but I think that JackQPR might be back editing again. Back on 15th February you fully protected the List of hooligan firms article to try and stop JackQPR. However, a new user, StevenDB (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) is adding what seems to be identical content. Clearly they can't add content to the above article but they have done so to the Football hooliganism article and have created the article, QPR Youth wing using exactly the same sources as JackQPR used. It was content about the "QPR Youth wing" which started all this in the first place. Any chance you could have a check and see if it is indeed the same person or at least likely to be? Thanks.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 22:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC) Reverted article Thanks. The article had a main linked version - with the attack info in it, as well as what was liekly the original version without the attack words. I cleaned it up. I'm not sure about notability or size of market. May be worth spending a little time looking for more information. — ERcheck (talk) 01:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC) Looks like I missed some if the bad stuff. Thanks for catching it all. — ERcheck (talk) 01:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC) Seems that it has been in the article since January 11th [2], inserted by 75.37.215.70. — ERcheck (talk) 01:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC) Vic Porcelli Thanks for commenting...I am kinda wiki-ignorant and keep removing the negative post, and it keeps reappearing! Advice on a redirect I should have mentioned at the recent AFD for the Mickey Renaud article, that we should likely redirect it to the Windsor Spitfires article. As opposed to just recreating the article as a redirect, what would be the best way to make that proposal? Flibirigit (talk) 02:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC) You've been Blocked   You've been Blocked Presented for much appreciated efforts at sorting out whom to use that button on. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC) good cop/bad cop? see; Special:Contributions/68.5.189.128 Special:Contributions/Mocktard Maybe it's just bad faith on my part, but it looks like the same user to me. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC) Deletion Review Since the lister hasn't informed you, a deletion review has been requeston on one of your recent AFD closures. Wikipedia:DRV#Mickey_Renaud. --81.104.39.63 (talk) 07:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC) Protection of Michael Willis Hi, You had semi-protected Michael Willis, I think after the exchanges at ANI. DumbBot has just removed a template from the page. I don't understand how protection works, but I wonder if you have a moment to take a look and see if everything is as it should be, please? TIA, --AndrewHowse (talk) 15:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC) G. Edward Griffin talk page The article on G. Edward Griffin has been recreated by the admin who had deleted it previously, so the talk page can be unprotected now.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 08:52, 1 March 2008 (UTC) Hello, Black Kite. You have new messages at Cro0016's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. VivianDarkbloom Per this discussion, I believe VivianDarkbloom to be the bad hand of a good hand/bad hand pair. Thought you might want to take that into consideration.Kww (talk) 15:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC) Head up - I was indef blocking per discussion while you were counseling waiting a bit longer. Any response at ANI, I should think... Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC) My RfA File:David,larry.JPG My RFA Thank you muchly for your support in my recent request for adminship, which was successfully closed on 76%, finishing at 73 supports, 23 opposes and 1 neutral. The supports were wonderful, and I will keep in mind the points made in the useful opposes and try to suppress the Larry David in me! Now I'm off to issue some cool down blocks, just to get my money's worth! Kidding btw. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 11:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC) help desk comments Hi - those comments are largely incoherent so I have no idea what they are on about, but thought you should know about them. --Fredrick day (talk) 12:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC) List of hooligan firms Well it took just two days for the edits to start again after full protection was changed to semi-protection. And the same edits yet again. I did think that the user StevenDB was another sockpuppet of the blocked user and it would seem that is the case as it is exactly the same edit yet again. I have again reverted them, but have had to do so twice now within only a few minutes and I suspect he will be back again to just add itback in yet again. I have tried (yet again) to point out why the edits are being reverted, but it always seems to "fall on deaf ears". Any chance you could have a look, and maybe find out if StevenDB is a sockpuppet? Thanks.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 15:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC) arghhh. Just as I was leaving you the above message, StevenDB simply ignores my message on his talk page and adds the edit back in yet again. That is three times just today. I have already reverted it twice and I don't want to revert again today (3RR and all that!), but given that StevenDB has also twice tried to create the "QPR Youth Wing" article then surely he must be a sockpuppet of JackQPR? Hope you can help when you are back on wikipedia, thanks and apologies for bringing this up yet again.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 15:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC) Thank you for your input, I am just sorry to have had to ask you. To try and resolve it I've searched online for a reliable source but can't find anything unfortunately.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 17:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC) I have similar thoughts to be honest about the Luton Town MIG article. I will have another read through it again later today and maybe see about at least adding some tags/removing some stuff. There is no doubt they exist/existed, it is hard at times though with hooligan firms to "cut through the crap" (to put it bluntly) and see what is real and not just either made up or totally exaggerated! StevenDB seems to be unwilling to take on board anything said to him though! Thanks. ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 17:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC) Block of 68.118.186.200 Hello. At first, I thought it was a shared IP. but then I realized: my cousin comes over to babysit me a lot, and he wanted to create a Wikipedia account. He was very interested in vandalism, laughing out loud as I showed him some. It must have been him; I would never vandalize WP. WP has a special place in my heart. I will talk to him and tell him to stop vandalizing. Anyway, thank you for doing the right thing and blocking that bad account. ♥Shapiros10WuzHere♥ 12:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC) Actually, you've misrepresented what my user page actually said; I could discuss it better, except you've censored it and I don't feel like digging through my history to prove a point, when I don't believe you are genuinely interested in justice. Lirath Q. Pynnor (talk) a kiwi sock? See Special:Contributions/Samneric. I'm especially curious to see what happens on Martin Banwell. Cheers, Jack Merridew 16:03, 8 March 2008 (UTC) compare two edit summaries: [3] [4] Cheers, Jack Merridew 16:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC) re: Irrelevant? Huh? Roddy Piper = RP. Starcade = SC. How is that irrelevant? 142.162.189.143 (talk) 15:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)