User talk:Ultraexactzz

Welcome to my User Talk page. I'll reply to any message you leave here on your talk page, unless you wish otherwise and say so. If I haven't answered you in a short time, it's possible that I am away from a computer at the moment - I assure you, I will get back to you. If you came here because of a deletion I performed, please make sure to note which article or image I deleted, as there's no way I can reply unless I know. Thanks again, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence

Balachandran AfD

I don't see what the problem could be. It looks like the usual discussion. Do you think it should be kept? Make an argument and I could change my mind. Did someone mess with your account, or someone else's? Are you surprised that I actually made my 3rd AfD nom in 13 months? :-) Bearian (talk) 15:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Following your blocking of Clem32 (that was of course not created by me), I have to show you 2 things. The first is in French, the discussion with other administrators about the problems with Boubaker and Mario Scolas. The second is in english, m:Vandalism reports/BogaertB, talking about what Mario Scolas has done on the French and Dutch WP. 260 vandal accounts on the sole french, 400 approx on all different WP. If you know how I should proceed to get the permanent blocking of this guy on en:WP do tell me. I'm ready to give any necessary information for a check-user (I'm a check-user myself) or to other admins. If you can do something, thanks in advnce. On the other hand, if you can't I do not blame you, I've stopped counting the hours that I lost because of Scolas, his vandalisms and his socks. See you. Clem23 (talk) 22:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

be aware

Sir ! be aware from Clem23 propsals, they caused damage to Droop and many other! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonton Bradipus (talk • contribs) 13:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for deletion

Many thanks for deleting my user page as requested.

If you agree with my rationale, would you consider deleting my user talk page as well?

Also it worries me a bit that it's still possible for someone to create a new user page for me - is there any way to prevent that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Csymeonides (talk • contribs) 13:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Concerning the delete

I have posted my reply to the deletion of the "Beyond protocol" article, I would be very happy if a discussion could be held.

Here are 4 link, do you think this is enough? I will continue to look for more anyway.

http://www.mmortsgamers.com/content/view/168/1/ http://www.mmortsgamers.com/content/view/167/1/ http://beyondprotocol.wikidot.com http://www.beyondprotocol.com

Thank you for the help, just tell me what you think after reading these.

Rolles (talk) 15:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)rolles

Your opinion about the article is clear

that is your right.. but when you allowed the first part of the discussion remain in this page you made voters badly informed, so continue to be honest...Citypark2008 (talk) 15:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok; Thank you for all.Citypark2008 (talk) 15:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Before saying good bye ,we tell you that we would have been really upset if you resonded positively to the following request :

..... If you know how I should proceed to get the permanent blocking of this guy on en:WP do tell me. I'm ready to give any necessary information for a check-user (I'm a check-user myself) or to other admins. If you can do something, thanks in advnce. On the other hand, if you can't I do not blame you, ... Clem23 (talk) 22:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your human reaction.Citypark2008 (talk) 15:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

The only one who replies to my reports are him.

HE did violate 3rr correct? Uconnstud (talk) 18:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I understand. I'm hoping something can be worked out. He has been warned on so many occasions and uses so many different sockpuppets on the same article. A clear violation, but thanks for writing back. Uconnstud (talk) 18:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Recommending a page for deletion

I see you are an admin, so I am bugging you with this question. There's a page I'd like to recommend for deletion (Grayson Boucher), but I don't know how to go about doing so. Based on the talk page, it looks like there was some discussion before about deleting it, but nothing was resolved. If you could point me in the right direction, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks. Tool2Die4 (talk) 20:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Got it, thanks! Tool2Die4 (talk) 20:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Boubaker polynomials (2nd nomination)

Many thanks for all your "clean-up" work on that page. After Clem23, it seems it's my turn to be dirtyed by user:Mario Scolas's socks.

Darkoneko (talk) 06:42, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

TiconderogaCCB

Keeps deleting opinions that are contrary to his opinion in an attempt to build a consensus. It can be seen here [1] where this opinion was deleted "J.Delany agreed to this verions [2] - I agree to this verion as well [3] 63.113.199.109 (talk) 12:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)" his reason was vandalism and he says discussion was deleted when it was simply moved from the top to the bottom to go in chronological order(after he moved it). Also he asked for an opinion on which version is better [4] to which i was notified [5] and so was he [6] . When the third opinion came in [7] he simply ignored what the third opinion was and simply reverted the page [8]. I thought we had a compromise and would listen to the 3rd opinion, but now i'm really starting to wonder if there can be any compromise with him. Uconnstud (talk) 02:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC) I could mention the fact that he has been going to articles thru my history and stalking me commenting after me when he was never ever ever in the previous listed article at all. [9] Uconnstud (talk) 02:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[10] Uconnstud (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The supposed "deletion" was the deletion of duplicate text. No comments were deleted, and why would I have done so given that the comments were in my favor. Further, I have commented on J.Delany's third party opinion as has J.Delany, and we are now taking a poll to see what other editors prefer. Please ignore UConnStudd, he is simply trying every avenue to get me into trouble because he wants to vandalize the SJU article. See his history for more understanding of his relentless pursuit. - --TiconderogaCCB (talk) 20:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Also Note: An editor using 150.210.176.81 IP address posted the following extremely offensive comments on my talk page and user page [11][12]. These comments included, "you are one poor sarcastic sucker! have you ever gotten laid or have you always paid for it you sonnuva bitch!". This IP is part of Baruch College, the same source for IP's used by User:Uconnstud in past comments in which he did not use his user name, see User talk:150.210.176.218 & User talk:150.210.226.6. - --TiconderogaCCB (talk) 02:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

That is pretty funny considering that the only thing that any of those IP address and I have in common is that we've edited on the St. John's page. You do know that Baruch College has about 15,000 students. St John's has about 15,000 too. I've always used my username. You on the other hand.. are famous for not using it [13]. Its funny how we now see random IP address who are suddenly coming out of nowhere and agreeing with you. When they have no history of editing at all [14] and [15]. All supporting "option 1." Uconnstud (talk) 03:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Fixer-Upper

nope, that's fine. Thanks for checking! I withdrew since it was going to close per WP:SNOW and we moved the discussion to Talk:Fixer-Upper TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 21:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Dictionary AfD

Thank you very much. Basketball110 _{will you sign?} ♣ 02:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

	The Hidden Barnstar
	This user has found Basketball110's secret hidden sub page! Can you find it?

Basketball110 _{will you sign?} ♣ 02:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fizber (internet company)

I disagree with your close at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fizber (internet company). There was a large amount of canvassing by the person who created the article and no reliable third-party sources about the subject were presented. --- RockMFR 21:45, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

My request for bureaucratship

Dear Ultraexactzz, thank you for taking part in my RfB. As you may know, it was not passed by bureaucrats.
I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your support, despite concerns cited by the opposition. Although RfA/B isn't really about a person, but more about the community, I was deeply touched and honoured by the outpouring of support and interest in the discussion. I can only hope that you don't feel your opinion was not considered enough - bureaucrats have to give everyone's thoughts weight.
I also hope that the results of this RfB lead to some change in the way we approach RfBs, and some thought about whether long-entrenched standards are a good thing in our growing and increasingly heterogenous community.
I was a little miserable after the results came out, so I'm going to spread the love via dancing hippos. As you do. :)
I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. If at any point you see something problematic in my actions, please do not hesitate to call me out. ~ Riana ⁂ 11:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sleaze rock

That would be great; thanks.Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 22:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Democracy of information

Thanks, and sorry you had to clean up after me! That template got speedied for whatever reason. --Prewitt81 (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

*cough*

Have a look? ~ Riana ⁂ 16:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Not anymore. Ah, blissful silence :D ~ Riana ⁂ 16:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Kevin Pearson

All state legislators, past and present, by definition have been declared inherently notable. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The same editor created the Bizzaro article, and after I deleted it, with a nice little note about notability, he recreated it. I've re-deleted it. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Blackest Night close

Thank you for a careful and well-reasoned AfD closure. If AfDs were routinely treated with that much attention and nuance the page would be considerably less dysfunctional. Phil Sandifer (talk) 22:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

rofl

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. Also for updating my vandalism count. I reloaded my watchlist and saw the "ding" edit summary. After I realized what was going on I literally laughed out loud and my sister asked me what was so funny. That was great!! Have a good day, and may the vandals fail... J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

J.delanoy^gabs_adds has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Please accept my apology for the Katol Chandikadevi Picture comment

I am sorry for the uncivil comments.But a user GPPande who I think merits the use of those comments is being disruptive with my work for reasons beyond my comprehension.The picture being discussed is of my "family deity" and Katol is my native place.I have clicked that image with my own camera and I want other people who are from Katol to have a glimpse of this fine deity.No one in his/her right mind would remove such an image which is released into public domain with such good intentions.If you are an administrator or a powerful person on wikipedia you can request GPPande to edit only those pages about which he has some knowledge to contribute/or simply ban him if you can.He is editing the Nagpur and Vidarbha page and he doesn't even live there.If such people are not stopped wikipedia will become a timepass for out of work people.I apologise again for the bad language -Niranjan Deshmukh —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niranjandeshmukh (talk • contribs) 17:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

A sincere question

I have noticed that during my interaction with people on wikipedia,the admins or people like you intervene and give very good advice.Advice which can be used in the real world also.I want to know the source of your wisdom."Walk away" is sound advice.Is there a book or a manual where I can find it? Sincerely,Niranjan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niranjandeshmukh (talk • contribs) 17:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Heads-up

Thanks for the heads-up regarding the AN/I thread! --Kralizec! (talk) 13:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

• I've responded on the WP:AN/I noticeboard. Steve Crossin (talk) 13:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Advice on article

Hi. I need some admin advice on a new article - The day in the life of a forensic entomologist. Is it unencylcopedic? I wasn't sure so I haven't tagged it. Take whatever action you think. It is more of a diary than an encylcopedia entry. If you think it's alright, it just needs some cleanup. Thanks Olly₁₅₀ 18:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, just wanted to make sure Olly₁₅₀ 10:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Socks

Thanks for your message - I'd be inclined to leave the original report alone, but tag the user page of the newly blocked sock with {{sockpuppet}} - anyone wanting to know the reason for the block can click through to User:Erwin Morland where there's a convenient link to the evidence page from WP:SSP. Thanks. _GB^T/C 17:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, in cleaning up the category when creating it, I accidentally did the tagging of William K. Reed for you. Wasn't meaning to tread on your toes! Regards. _GB^T/C 17:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

WHY

WHY ARE YOU REMOVING/REDOING MY EDITS. SO WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS THAT YOU RATHER LIKE INCORRECT GRAMMAR RUN-ON SENTENCES AND FALSE INFORMATION, BECAUSE THATS WHAT YOU ARE SHOWING ME. RUN ON's are not correct sentence structure. and the information about the uncut-bilingual being illegal in the united states is sourceless and false, also looking at the history that information was added by a IP user. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.208.73.158 (talk) 18:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Sir I have edited this users content, but the user kept reverting

I agree completely with your accusations, but you need to understand that this is why I have been requesting the blocks against the user Thegingerone in the first place.Kevin j (talk) 19:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

In Response

No, I do not write like that kind of of person. The user harasses me, I respond. And no, the dispute will not be resolved for another day, because it needs to be resolved NOW. Read the content the user wrote earlier, because yes there is vandalism. Also, I only wrote the questions three times because it didn't seem like me voice was getting heard.Kevin j (talk) 20:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank for your concern. To answer you questions, all I want is the administrators to enforce the content in the articles like they should be enforced. One crucial policy to me is the NPOV policy. I want the resolution to be resolved through this enforcement, and I want it to be made clear to Thegingerone that it will be enforced and that it must be followed, and that the user, like all other users, will be blocked if the vandalism continues. BestKevin j (talk) 20:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Hi there Ultraexactzz. Just a note of thanks for your support in my recent unsuccessful RfA. I do appreciate your vote and advice. I'll be back in a few months with more experience and more coaching, so I hope to have your support again then. Thanks again - Tanthalas39 (talk) 18:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Sharesource

Good job on cleaning the sharesource article.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 15:29, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I originally tagged it for advertising language before I applied the speedy tag. After a about fifteen minutes of good searching I couldn't find anything reliable so I speedy tagged it. I think the editor is going to be between a rock and hard place for sources and it might never make it past an AfD, but I'll keep my eye out for anything that might be of value.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 15:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Magillem

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Magillem. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. - Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Quick question on policy

Lists like that aren't allowed - the relevant policy is WP:UCS. :D Just remove it and block away if they try to play Johnny Dangerous. east.718 at 02:26, March 26, 2008

Apollo 8

By all means put the text in as a seperate section, but for consistency with all other spaceflight articles the bulleted list should be kept in place at the start. Hammersfan, 26/03/08, 23.29 GMT

Not really, because, as I have stated, for concistency every manned spaceflight article would need to be so altered. Besides, having looked at the text in detail, much of what is relevant I have put in the bullet list or added as notes. I have listed below bullet points about my views on the text:

• Date crew announced: Irrelevant - why should the date this crew was announced matter any more than the date any other crew was announced?
• Crew: Bulleted alongside roles - what their previous flights were is irrelevant in the context of this flight; all that is needed is the number of flights they have made as with all other missions.
• Swapping of Collins and Lovell: Mention made in the brief note I have left, along with the reason and the reference.
• Reason for Backup crew: Irrelevant, because that comes under the heading of "the blooming obvious" - for such a task, there are always backups.
• Haise being drafted in: Mention made in the brief note I have left.
  

Putting in a standard crew bullet list with notes, as is the case on other manned spaceflight articles, does not detract from its status as a featured article, but to me the whole point is that related pages should follow certain standards of concistency - manned spaceflight missions have similar layouts, and this mission, important as it was and well written as it may be, should follow these also. Hammersfan 27/03/08, 00.12 GMT

User:Pope Barry George

On top of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muscle derived stem cells that you commented, he also posted this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Jordan (singer) and please notice my comment about that "Jimbo" comment. Something need to be done.SYSS Mouse (talk) 15:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Someone vandalized my Userspace! But a little angel came along and fixed it! Thank you! You can thank others by using {{subst:Vangel}}! Nburden ^(T) 16:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

How Do You Submit An Entry In Checkuser

I haven't so long I forget how to add Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mr Bullockx to the main checkuser page. -WarthogDemon 20:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. This is just ridiculous and I hope I can remain civil about it all. Happy editing! -WarthogDemon 20:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

You said it! But, I will not vent my frustration here. I will vent it by playing a computer game. There's nothing like causing death and destruction to entire civilizations, just because you feel like it. :) -WarthogDemon 21:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Suciindia

Hi, User:Suciindia posted some comments in talk page. The vandalism done by the IP 213.160.242.61 certainly does not belong to User:Suciindia. User:Suciindia is from India and the IP used by this account certainly will be of India. IP 213.160.242.61 is from Oslo [16]. This IP certainly does not belong to User:Suciindia. User:Suciindia is controlled by an Indian party. So can you review the block. Thanks. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 10:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 14	31 March 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimania 2009 to be held in Buenos Aires	Sister Projects Interview: Wikisource
WikiWorld: "Hammerspace"	News and notes: 10M articles, $500k donation, milestones
Dispatches: Featured content overview	WikiProject Report: Australia
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 22:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Got the warning

The inclusion of the links along with my signature has discontinued... Can you please tell me what on earth the point thatHu12 is attempting to make? DrunkenDialer (talk) 08:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

ECOLAS

Dear UltraExactZZ, I stand for ECOLAS which has an article in Wikipedia that was challenged by you. You are asking to provide references. However, I don't know which certain information shold be marked with source. We are only starting organization and there are not many paper or electronic sources yet. Anyway, I would like to add anything if possible. But I myself don't see the information in the article as of nature where external references would be appropriate yet. Show me in which I am wrong. Thank you in advance for informing me so that I can enhance article's quality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrej blacky (talk • contribs) 11:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I've made corrections according to your comment. Is that enough to take tags references and wikify away? Isn't it rude to do it myself? --Andrej blacky (talk) 12:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Acknowledgement

Sorry about the messages. I didn't mean to violate policy, I've interacted with the above admins and wanted them to have first notice. No canvassing meant. ESCStudent774441 (talk) 03:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep it cool, okay?ESCStudent774441 (talk) 03:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)