Jump to content

User talk:HiDrNick: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
reply
Line 211: Line 211:
Hi, I just came across your bot request, and noticed that you said it would run automatically every five minutes. Despite considerable googling, I've not worked out how to do this for PHP bots I run on the Wiki, as cron doesn't seem to be applicable. Would you mind terribly pointing me in the right direction? Thanks! [[User:Smith609|Smith609]]&nbsp;'''<small>[[User_talk:Smith609|Talk]]</small>''' 23:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I just came across your bot request, and noticed that you said it would run automatically every five minutes. Despite considerable googling, I've not worked out how to do this for PHP bots I run on the Wiki, as cron doesn't seem to be applicable. Would you mind terribly pointing me in the right direction? Thanks! [[User:Smith609|Smith609]]&nbsp;'''<small>[[User_talk:Smith609|Talk]]</small>''' 23:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
:I've not had any trouble with "php -f /path/to/script.php >> /path/to/outputlog " in the crontab. &#10154;[[User_talk:HiDrNick|<span style="color:#CC3300">Hi</span><span style="color:#0088FF"><b>DrNick</b></span>]]! 00:50, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
:I've not had any trouble with "php -f /path/to/script.php >> /path/to/outputlog " in the crontab. &#10154;[[User_talk:HiDrNick|<span style="color:#CC3300">Hi</span><span style="color:#0088FF"><b>DrNick</b></span>]]! 00:50, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

== Help with removing a fake quote from Wikipedia articles ==

There is a conflict regarding a known fake quote being cited as a real quote on a few Wikipedia pages. One instance of the quote can be found at the fifth bulleted quote [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillip_E._Johnson#Criticisms here]. It states:
<blockquote>
The objective [of the Wedge Strategy] is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the non-existence of God. From there people are introduced to 'the truth' of the Bible and then 'the question of sin' and finally 'introduced to Jesus.'
</blockquote>
I discovered reliable sources [http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/02/post-4.html here] and [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Phillip_E._Johnson here] that show the quote to be phony. I attempted to remove the falsely attributed quotes and cited those sources, but I now find myself falsely "reported" (read: "threatened") by Orangemarlin as a vandal. Again, actually, since he falsely accused me of the same before. Orangemarlin has also reverted the edits and refused to respond to my inquiries why, simply deleting my questions as supposedly "uncivil." [[Special:Contributions/67.135.49.116|67.135.49.116]] ([[User talk:67.135.49.116|talk]]) 05:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:20, 17 June 2008



HiDrNick!

Yeah, this picture is like 10 years old.
Yeah, this picture is like 10 years old.

Heyo. I’m Nick, a data scientist from Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA. I had a baby girl about a year ago five years ago (wow, has it been that long?) seven years ago (yikes!) eleven years ago (!!), which had curtailed my on-wiki time severely.

I used to spend a lot of time on-wiki removing fair-use galleries from articles, but it seems that the crusade has finally been won, for the most part. Then I would Huggle in my copious free time, and lurk at WP:ANI, WP:RFA, and WP:MFD, where I occasionally chime in. I also enjoy making {{editprotected}} requests on the upcoming blurb for Today’s featured article; it has all of the cheap thrills of seeing your work on the main page, but with none of the grueling work of actually writing an FA.

Nowadays, if I'm editing, I was probably reading an article and noticed a quick issue.

Let me know if I can help you with anything, and I'll do my best, or point you in the direction to someone who can.

Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page by starting a new thread, using a descriptive header. Please link usernames and page tiles. I will normally answer on this page, and ping you on your talk page as well.

For the record, I'm not a real doctor, but I am a real Nick.


Ways to contact me:

Talk page archives:

Commendation for bold initiative and hard work which you put into Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Scooter for Yaksmas. - Gavin Collins - 16 January 2008 For reverting the page blanking and vandalism placed on my talk page. Thank you very much! - MelicansMatkin - 28 January 2008 Wish I had your communication skills, you seem to be heading for a much better outcome of the Kafziel case. I do hope saner heads prevails but felt your level headed comments were due some recognition. - WeeCurryMonster - 24 January 2014



My RfA

Hi, Hi! Thanks again for the support, and the vote of confidence with respect to my RfA. I'll try not to inadvertently delete you when I save this note... Cheers! --Ckatzchatspy 04:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle User Category

Hi there. I have seen that you use huggle by the fact that you have automatically updated the huggle white list(it does this when closing huggle). I was wondering if you would add the category [[Category:Wikipedians who use Huggle]] to your user page so that it fills out and we know who actually uses huggle. If you do not want to you do not have to. I am also sorry if i have already talked to you about this or you no longer use huggle but i sent it to everyone that has edited the page since mid January. I hope we can start to fill out this category. If you would like to reply to this message then please reply on my talk page as i will probably not check here again. Thanks. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 18:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ➪HiDrNick! 03:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh, how does one get rid of the notices on the top of an article. They've been up there for months and I've revised my article as much as possible. Thanks, Sandra

Business-education partnerships.--Sanhealy (talk) 19:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle Category Problem

Hi there.You are receiving this message from me as you have not added your huggle category correctly. At the moment on category here you can see that you are sorted under the letter U. To fix this please change the [[Category:Wikipedians who use Huggle]] to [[Category:Wikipedians who use Huggle|YOURNICKNAMEHERE]]. This will fix the problem. If you do not change this within a few days then i will do this for you but i would prefer to send you a message like this than just go and change your page. If you want to contact me then please use my talk page as i will not be checking back here. Thanks for your help. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 16:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question for you

at Talk:Dante's Cove, if you don't mind? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 04:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Answered. Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 04:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

beer company

There is no reason to mark them for del you just are doing it because I am new at this. All of these drink companies are important the energy drink company is the only one in the world like it and the beer company is the only working one based in Alabama it looks like you just like to put thinks on real / imported info that means to me you don’t do your research before and that make you and others like you look a kid I am new at this and this is hard for me to do. I worked over 8hr on the energy drink today it would be nice if you would help people like me. I know the owners and they are good people that is how I I have the info on the companies. PAT LONG —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pat Long (talkcontribs) 08:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Pat. I didn't mark those articles for deletion, another editor did. I just restored the notice to the page. If you'd like to discuss the deletion, you can participate in the debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emerald Coast Beer Company and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vulcan Energy Drink. I'll leave some more information on your talk page about writing your first article. Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 08:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DEL

Who is the one that make the decision and why two of them have been up for about a year why now? Because I am doing more work. PAT —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pat Long (talkcontribs) 08:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussions usually run for about a week and are decided upon by an experienced user called an administrator. You are allowed to improve the articles while the discussion is going on, but please don't remove the notice from the top of the pages that tell other editors about the discussion. The easiest way to show that this article should stay in Wikipedia is to find news stories about the company or the product and show us where they can be found online. If no news sources have written about the company yet, there's no way for us to tell if everything in the article is just made up or not, so we will probably delete it. On the other hand, if you can find several articles about the company or it's product, the article may be kept. One way or the other, I will not make the decision. Good luck. ➪HiDrNick! 08:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for my rudeness.

This is not vandalism nor a product of it, so please be reasonable. We are simply trying to create a factual piece of information about the Hyper Magazine Forums. If you don't believe that the majority of the forums do not read the magazine you are welcome to go to the site and compare the number of posters who actually discuss the magazine to the number of posters who are active in other areas of the community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.111.81.74 (talk) 09:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Zap"

Got your back... --Ckatzchatspy 09:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. ➪HiDrNick! 10:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Final Notice - VIOLATION of Wikipedia rules.

With all due respect, adding appropiate and legitimate links to wikipedia articles is a clear right of every user. I am deeply saddened that there are individuals within the Wikipedia community threatening to ban my posts, given my proof that my additions are in fact legitimate. I will be contacting Wikipedia's organizers with a formal complaint should your threats be honored. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmatadeen (talkcontribs) 04:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleveland Steamer

How is adding the band Blood, Sweat and Beers to 'Cleveland Steamer' possibly vandalism? It is a popular band that has a song titled "Cleveland Steamer." This makes no sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.84.73 (talk) 09:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My request for bureaucratship

Deletion to a legitimate edit

Alas, sir, by the preceding posts on your page it appears that you have deleted edits by others who claim them to be legitimate as well. (See edit history on my "Ginger Kids" article edit.) Although I appreciate your vigilance in trying to keep articles pure of inappropriate content, you should not go overboard and simply blacklist good-faith edits as "unconstructive" or "vandalism" without discussing why the edit doesn't belong. Even if an edit doesn't belong, i.e. is not "notable", it is not necessarily in the same category as spamming/vandalism. That's my spiel. Wykypydya (talk) 03:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. The edit you are referring to was in fact not constructive, which is exactly what the template said about it. The template does not say anything about vandalism. Disambiguation pages are not intended to list every article containing the disambiguation term. No one expects that a user who searches for the term "Ginger" is actually expecting to see the page about that particular episode of a television show. Dab pages loose their navigation utility as more and more cruft is added to them. ➪HiDrNick! 03:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That has to be the most unconventional reasoning I have ever seen about why to exclude something from a disambiguation page -- I have always thought that disambiguation pages admit all pertinent articles and it has nearly always been my experience that disambiguation pages contain as many pertinent references as editors can think of. Also, it has happened on many occasions that I would look for a very specific instance about a certain encyclopedia topic, and it wasn't listed in the disambiguation page, and I was quite frustrated yet took the initiative to add it myself, or on the converse (this situation), I would find an article that is not referenced by its disambiguation page and improve it that way, or inversely, that I did find something very specific in the disambig and it was quite helpful.
Could you perhaps cite a Wikipedia guideline that makes that recommendation? Maybe there has been some kind of new decision I don't know about. (They tend to change sometimes.) --Wykypydya (talk) 03:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They are a moving target, that's for sure. WP:DAB has some info about what not to include in disambiguation pages. In this instance, I think that "partial title matches" applies. There's also a section of the manual of style linked from there as well.
It's not a black and white issue though, by any means, and I do tend to get in a hurry when reverting--it's part of the whole nature of keeping up with the changes. I assure you though, most of the people further on up the page are spammers and cranks.  :-P I know that you were editing in good faith, and a "warning", however worded, is bothersome. ➪HiDrNick! 04:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This edit makes a wikilink where only half of the word is linked, which is not something that we usually do. What does "Untitled gelo Movie" mean? ➪HiDrNick! 04:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know how to lock pages?

Sorry, I'm not able to keep pages from being edited; since this is a wiki, anyone can edit it. After all, maybe someone will come along and make the article even better.  :) ➪HiDrNick! 04:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But why is it that the wiki of Zac Efron is very protected?But [[[Angel Locsin]] is free to edit even Angel is the most famous star in the Philippines.{Jennyandalizapurok4 (talk) 04:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)}[reply]
Oh, you're thinking of semi-protection, which prevents anonymous users from editing the page. I've requested that that protection be removed from the Zac Efron page, it's been there for much too long. Generally administrators will only semi-protect a page that has had very heavy vandalism, and then only for a short time. It looks like this one was just overlooked. ➪HiDrNick! 04:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia restricts free speech! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.68.207 (talk) 06:02, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User 203.59.135.237

Could you block this user. This user had a final warning before vandalizing Ranga. Footballfan190 (talk) 06:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Man, you're quick. Before I could delete the text you had already saved the corrected version. Mad props. I sent a copyright infringement notice b/c of the mention of the specific torrent file system, mixed with the direct link to the album. Wouldn't want a controversy. InvisibleDiplomat (talk) 06:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 15:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Just wanted to point out a minor inaccuracy in your evidence. You said "Betacommand also claimed that "removing deleted/non-existent categories is something that BCBot has been doing for a long time," but has been unable to provide any diffs to substantiate this extremely unlikely claim" - in fact Betacommand has now provided at least one set of edits, and I think people are analysing BetacommandBot's contribs to find more. I'm referring to this thread, and the edits here. Feel free to submit this in your evidence section. I won't have much time to submit evidence until after Easter. Carcharoth (talk) 21:19, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Between Betacommand, Betacommand2, and off-wiki communications, I have a hard time keeping up with everything that Betacommand says. :) ➪HiDrNick! 21:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

not letting me post

im trying to post a definition of the name Powell on here because it is a definition that my family has lived by for generations but it keeps saying that its not important ur it isn't needed but I feel that it is. How can i get it to stay up and be legitimate. the other definitions are no better than my familys. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicknooo (talkcontribs) 06:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AIV report

Hey, I declined your recent WP:AIV report for User:124.168.39.178 since his/her edits definitely weren't vandalism; on the contrary, they were pretty nice good faith edits. Another WP:HUGGLE malfunction? Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am using Huggle, I'll look into it. ➪HiDrNick! 06:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SIP Magazine (Philippines) tagged for speedy deletion

An article that you have been involved in editing, SIP Magazine (Philippines), has been tagged for speedy deletion as it is substantially the same as a previous artilce which was speedily deleted (SIP Magazine which was recreated as a redirect. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BigHairRef | Talk 20:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes

Yes on the Michael Jackson article why does it not have a link for his awards


"Tymike07 (talk) 03:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)"[reply]

Hi, Nick! I hope you excuse my ignorance...I've been trying hard to understand the rules on copyrighted images, but it can be really complex. The album infobox has been removed a couple of times from the above article - is there a rule or guideline somewhere about this? If you can point me in the right direction I will leave a note on the article talkpage. Thanks! Nesodak (talk) 17:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, I removed the infobox because the article is about the person, not the single. It really looks as though the box was just included to have a place to put a nonfree image anyway. I hope this helps, ➪HiDrNick! 18:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry - what was the policy or guideline covering this? Nesodak (talk) 18:34, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NONFREE. I've posted on the article talk. I didn't realize that you were specifically concerned about the image. I should have paid closer attention. ➪HiDrNick! 18:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I replied there, thanks! Nesodak (talk) 18:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing other's comments

You probably shouldn't edit other people's comments, as you did here. I had no objection to this, especially since the user credited me in the comment. (It was GFDL anyway, so the user could reprint as he pleased). I'm not sure exactly why you deleted it, any explanation is welcome. Nesodak (talk) 22:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cross positing other user's comments into deletion debates is not appropriate. I'm unsure of how to explain something so immediately apparent? ➪HiDrNick! 00:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:TALK#Others' comments - "Do not strike out the comments of other editors without their permission." What policy are you citing regarding your statement above? Nesodak (talk) 13:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spider Solitaire

Hi Dr. Nick:

Thanks [?] for the "edit war warning". If you would kindly take a minute to check the discussion page for Spider Solitaire, you'll see that there is an ongoing discussion as to whether it is appropriate to include links at the end of the article leading to non-commercial sites to play the games. I looked around Wikipedia yesterday and there are such links on literally dozens of Wikipedia pages to other games (Dominoes, Reversi, Canasta, Minesweeper, Pac-Man, and so on). If I am to be "warned" for restoring the links, is it not "fair" also to "warn" those who delete them??? An "edit war" takes two parties and it isn't right to disable the editing of only one side. Wikipedia needs to set a clear rule and have it be applied consistently across the board in such cases. In the absence of a clear rule, I think I have every right to restore the links any time anyone else deletes them. Thanks. If you want to email me, do so at dslsca@hotmail.com 206.74.61.67 (talk) 14:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk. Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 14:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HiDrNick: Now that I am permitted to be back on Wikipedia, I can respond to you. Your message on my talk page was offensive. To encourage me to register and help rid Wiki pages of the kind of links you know I support is condescending. You seem more interested in having your own point of view carry the day than you do in engaging in productive discussion (or else you would not have blocked me). Obviously two more Wiki-users have "reverted" the links since you pompously declared the debate over; this indicates to me that the debate continues. I believe I have every right to participate in it. Since such links to play the games are found on the VAST MAJORITY of game pages with no controversy whatsoever, it is inappropriate to make Spider Solitaire an exception, even if you are right about the question. Please don't block me again; you've reverted the pages just as often as I have and you wouldn't want to be blocked, would you? Perhaps the "golden rule" could apply here? I.e., don't block me for doing the same exact thing you are doing yourself! BTW, I AM a real doctor. Folks who pretend to have my hard-earned degree by calling themselves "doctor" are simply misrepresnting themselves in a way akin to lying. Since you were kind enough to give me the "step away from the dead horse" message, I'll respond in turn: Don't be a dick. 206.74.61.67 (talk) 18:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an administrator, so I could not block you even if I wanted to. Your block log shows that you have been blocked twice for spamming, once recently by Orangemike (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), and in November by KnowledgeOfSelf (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). If you feel you block was not supported by our policies, you can air your grievances with them, although I assure you it was. It is clear from your contributions history that you've been attempting to spam these links from some time. If you do not stop, eventually the page may be semi-protected, will will prevent unregistered editors from editing the page in any way at all, or the link may be added to the local spam blacklist which will prevent any user from including it in a page at all.
As for my username, if you fell that it's inappropriate, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names is down the hall and to the left. Knock yourself out. ➪HiDrNick! 20:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Review for Son of Stimpy

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Son of Stimpy. 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. Catchpole (talk) 13:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ST47 and page protection

Please see here. Is the page unprotection enough, or do you want further assurances from ST47? Carcharoth (talk) 19:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wash my hands of the nonsense. The use of passive verbs in the action summary "(...disputes which caused protection...") makes ST47's position on the matter crystal clear. He still obviously feels that his action was appropriate, and Arbcom isn't going to tell him otherwise (that would require doing something about something, which seems outside of the Arbcom remit lately). Any attempt to force the issue is futile. The Arbitration Committee is obviously disinterested in actually doing anything to resolve this or nearly any other problem coming out of this case, or really any other case for that matter. I'm done worrying about this particular issue.
I do appreciate your sincere attempts to address the concerns of many editors on many sides of this issue. Thanks. ➪HiDrNick! 20:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Thanks. I will link to your response over there. Carcharoth (talk) 01:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello HiDrNick,

I will appreciate if you kindly tell me what you found objectionable in my link on Nirvana and virtual reality [1]. This article was published as an editorial article in Times of India with 15 million circulation. I will appreciate if you please insert it as an external link.

Thanks.Akraj (talk) 14:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks

Thanks for your support in my RFA, that didn't quite make it and ended at 120/47/13. There was a ton of great advice there, that I'm going to go on. Maybe someday. If not, there are articles to write! Thanks for your support. Lawrence § t/e 17:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR and BLP

Hi! I've just got back from a delightful holiday in war-torn Sarajevo (!) and came across your concern that my removal of the "news" of Penelope Wilton's and Elizabeth Sladen's casting on a TV program didn't constitute a violation of WP:BLP. I took a look at the policy, and it says the following: Editors should remove any contentious material about living persons that is unsourced; the three-revert rule does not apply to such removals. Since Ms Sladen is alive - or was before I went on holiday... - and the information appears to have been unsourced, I genuinely don't understand how it fails the sentence I quoted above.

The only subjective part of the rule seems to be whether or not information is "contentious"; in the past, casting on Doctor Who has been a hot issue... Christopher Eccleston stormed out of a charity event after someone even mentioned the program to him - so I considered that putting actors in the article without reliable sources was iffy. Any thoughts? TreasuryTagtc 16:34, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Everybody!

Sorry, couldn't resist. :) Protonk (talk) 16:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HiDrNick! 16:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jimbo Box on WP:TOV

Perhaps you can discuss removing such things on the talk page? That would be very useful. Bstone (talk) 21:34, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I belive you've already commented on Wikipedia_talk:Threats_of_violence#Jimbo_box, a thread which I started. ➪HiDrNick! 21:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HiDrNick. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion can be found under the topic Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Absolutely inappropriate edit to WP:TOV by HiDrNick. Yours, Tiptoety talk 05:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. Initially I thought that you were the one to start the thread, which didn't seem like you at all. So belated thanks then. ➪HiDrNick! 05:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I know that I like it when I get notified when a thread is started about me so I thought you deserved the respect of a notification too. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 16:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do you get your username like that

When you sign your prsts with four tidles how do you get your name colorful like that? --RayquazaDialgaWeird2210 (talk) 23:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you click the "My Preferences" link at the top of the page, you can edit your signature. If you check the box that says "raw signature", you can use wiki markup to change the look of your signature. Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 02:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Emerald coast beer company (ECBC)

back 3 months ago the ECBC was DEL for know news i added news and it was DEL one more time this getting old i am told one then when i do it there is more BS can you help? Pat Long (talk) 03:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're having trouble with an article you're creating being speedily deleted, it's often best to work up a draft in your userpage, and have it vetted by some experienced users before moving it to the main article space. Why not create your article at User:Pat Long/Emerald Coast Beer Company, and let me know when you think it's ready. Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 01:11, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Doyle

Now that the AfD is concluded, when does the article get deleted? Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever an adminstrator gets around to it.  :) I'm not one myself, but the result of the debate was obvious, so I closed it, and tagged the article for speedy deletion with {{db-xfd}}. It should be deleted in not too much longer. Sorry about the confusion. Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 22:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Has now been deleted. ➪HiDrNick! 00:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes ive decided to concede defeat in regards to this one. I'm getting it removed

For future cases please remember to give the uploader proper notice on his/her talk page when you add a CSD or fiaruse tag to an article or picture. Cheers,   «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™ |l»  11:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since you've been edit warring over that image for several days now, I was confident that you were well aware of it's pending deletion, and saw little to be gained by cluttering your talk page up with further warnings. Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 13:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Running php scripts every five minutes

Hi, I just came across your bot request, and noticed that you said it would run automatically every five minutes. Despite considerable googling, I've not worked out how to do this for PHP bots I run on the Wiki, as cron doesn't seem to be applicable. Would you mind terribly pointing me in the right direction? Thanks! Smith609 Talk 23:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've not had any trouble with "php -f /path/to/script.php >> /path/to/outputlog " in the crontab. ➪HiDrNick! 00:50, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help with removing a fake quote from Wikipedia articles

There is a conflict regarding a known fake quote being cited as a real quote on a few Wikipedia pages. One instance of the quote can be found at the fifth bulleted quote here. It states:

The objective [of the Wedge Strategy] is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the non-existence of God. From there people are introduced to 'the truth' of the Bible and then 'the question of sin' and finally 'introduced to Jesus.'

I discovered reliable sources here and here that show the quote to be phony. I attempted to remove the falsely attributed quotes and cited those sources, but I now find myself falsely "reported" (read: "threatened") by Orangemarlin as a vandal. Again, actually, since he falsely accused me of the same before. Orangemarlin has also reverted the edits and refused to respond to my inquiries why, simply deleting my questions as supposedly "uncivil." 67.135.49.116 (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]