User talk:Luna Santin

Talk – Sandbox – Blog

Welcome to my talk page! I'll sometimes reply on your talk, but will frequently (increasingly often) reply here. When leaving messages, please remember these easy steps: • Use a ==descriptive heading== • Use [[wikilinks]] when mentioning users and pages • Sign your post with four tildes ~~~~ to leave your name and date If you're new to Wikipedia, please see Welcome to Wikipedia or frequently asked questions. Click here to leave me a message

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28.

Paul Hullah

I noticed you left a leaning delete vote on this AfD before the article was updated with many journal entries, etc. Would you mind revisiting the article and perhaps reconsidering your vote? --Faith (talk) 00:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Made an addendum to my prior comment; thanks for pointing that out. – Luna Santin (talk) 04:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for the reconsider. I think the AfD jumped the gun in not trying to improve the article first. --Faith (talk) 05:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Great work!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Awarded for your anti-vandal work today! Keep up the great work... Tiggerjay (talk) 06:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thank you. :) It's been a pretty good while since I saw one of these, too. So often the only feedback we Wikipedians give each other is negative, it's glad to see people spreading cheer and goodwill. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Always glad to spread the cheer - something I realized I need to return to. Find the good and praise it! Tiggerjay (talk) 07:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

sup?Wowisntfair (talk) 07:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

FYI

You might be interested in this: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Leon harrison :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 08:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hypocrisy

So long as you maintain that comments like this [1] are acceptable behavior, but the use of the word "unreliable" is not, I think the word "hypocrisy" is appropriate. When you tolerate comments like this [2]in an AFD that you are following, but profess outrage over my comments, I think the term "hypocrisy" is mandatory. The Enchantress Of Florence (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Care to point out where I "maintained" anything about the comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Connie Clausen, or where I have professed "outrage" over your comments? It's not so much your use of the word "unreliable" that I find problematic, but your needlessly abrasive and insulting response when questioned about it by a number of confused users who appear to be acting in good faith. – Luna Santin (talk) 11:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Given the levels of bad faith and malice shown in the AN/I discussion and on my talk page before I responded, I find your concern over my supposedly unnecessary abrasiveness misplaced. I seriously doubt the good faith of many of the participants in this dispute (note, for example, that the AN/I thread was initiated by a user who abrasively, insultingly, and gratuitously assumed bad faith because I was not available to respond to his hectoring within a space of a few hours). Given your lack of evenhandedness in this matter, I hardly think it unlikely that your real agenda lies elsewhere. Perhaps you can demonstrate otherwise, but I find that unikely. The Enchantress Of Florence (talk) 01:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I notice you didn't answer any of my questions. Curious what "real agenda" you think I have, while we're at it. Your allegations might carry more weight with others if you took a few moments to explain or justify them, from time to time, rather than simply repeating yourself or switching to new allegations when questioned. Anyhow, you're either going to continue the problem behavior or not at this point, so the ball is in your court. – Luna Santin (talk) 02:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Protection on Confederate government of Kentucky

You might want to semi it again. The next edit after you unprotected was Grawp. shoy 12:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Definitely keeping a close eye on it, as long as I'm still about. :) Appreciated. – Luna Santin (talk) 12:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Recent AN/I semi-protect

You recently responded to the following AN/I with a semi-protect and asked if there were other articles involved. The IP sock used by User:Pete_K is today on a tear through these other related articles [3]. Thanks for your help. Professor marginalia (talk) 01:03, 6 June 2008 (UTC) And currently editing with IP login 75.31.67.59. Professor marginalia (talk) 01:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for bringing that to my attention -- thought he might be back. Blocked both IPs, not sure if anything needs semi yet, but will keep an eye out. I've quickly put together User:Luna Santin/Sockwatch/Pete K, which should help keep track of these articles. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi! would you be able to discuss the ban evasion ip sock usage in this case with User:DianaW? This user has some questions that don't seem to have been answered to her satisfaction. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 18:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

SaddleAdam

It's that freak ClaimJumperPete again. I was trying to file a request for a checkuser, but I wasn't sure as to how. In the meantime, he was still disrupting the site via the sock's talk page. Could you protect it so that the idiot can't keep on with his nonsense? Thanks, Luna. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Question

What did I do wrong in the images just now? Huh? User:Fangusu (talk) 13:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)}}

Iron Man.

No big deal, **it happens. ThuranX (talk) 06:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 23	2 June 2008	About the Signpost

Board elections open	WikiWorld: "Facial Hair"
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes
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) 08:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Cowboycaleb56957

Thanks for blocking him. Regards, D.M.N. (talk) 11:57, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Of course. :) Also, mostly for my own reference, I need to keep a loose eye on Cowboycaleb799 (talk · contribs) if that account begins editing. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:58, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Ғгоѕтеԁ Ѡѕ

It's a Grawp sock. Ask User:Alison if you need more details. NawlinWiki (talk) 23:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

203.173.161.113

203.173.161.113 (talk · contribs) based on the nature of the vandalism I would've endorsed a much longer block (1 month)... Regarding the personal information divulged in the edits, should that be deleted from the history or oversighted? xenocidic (talk) 00:18, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I would say oversighted if anything; haven't yet sent in an email, but if you want to (or want me to), not a problem. Feel free to tweak the block as you like, too. – Luna Santin (talk) 00:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Hrm, no you go ahead with the oversight email. No worries about the block, we'll see what happens after the 48 hours. xenocidic (talk) 12:27, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk page

Thanks for the revert. At least I know why they are annoyed with me now. I wouldn't agree to a fairuse image of Freddie Mercury when there were several free ones available. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 09:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Sounds about right. Shame some people aren't more specific with raving complaints; might actually give us a chance to address them from time to time. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:43, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't know if you're watching this...

...but User:AvantVenger appears to have posted a response to your request for diffs on his(?) talk page. I did go through the contribs and various talk pages before I blocked him; he seems to have been fine until another editor drew his attention to some controversy over a patent claim, which he took as an attack and pretty much lost it. I feel his his subsequent name-calling was totally unacceptable, and my block was to prevent further disruption, but if you want to tweak it or unblock, feel free ;) EyeSerene^talk 11:35, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Oops, thought I replied to this last night, agreeing with you. Seems the situation has continued to deteriorate since then, too... anyhow, thanks. – Luna Santin (talk) 12:55, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Heh, no problem. And yes, I'd noticed the slippery slope - keeping tabs ;) EyeSerene^talk 17:17, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

ENom

My thanks to you and several other admins for the block against KillAllSpammers/TeerGrub re: ENom. You archived the request for checkuserpage on 5 June but I just saw it today. There are several other IPs that appear to be the same person. Is it advisable to add them to the list now, or wait and see whether the problem crops up again? Thanks, Thirdbeach (talk) 17:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Glad to be able to help. Looking at the page, I don't see any obvious ongoing issue, but should things crop up again, a request here at this talk page, WP:AN/I, WP:SSP, or WP:RFCU might be appropriate (IPs on the 67.150.x.x range are already mentioned as likely being related; other ranges may need a bit more looking into). – Luna Santin (talk) 01:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

AvantVenger also on WP:WQA

Just wanted to let you know that SteveBaker was also over at WP:WQA posting essentially the same information as in the post on ANI; I've edited out the email address there, but will leave any other action to you, as the first admin on the scene. Risker (talk) 05:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Jeff Albertson

Jeff Albertson (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is requesting unblock. Could you give a bit of insight into why he was blocked? I think the assumption is that it's a user building up edits to fly under the radar before doing page move vandalism? Just want to double check before action is taken. Metros (talk) 12:29, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Precisely. Several pagemove vandals including Panic, Leeroy (talk · contribs), Applesqsx (talk · contribs), Asleep at the Wheel (talk · contribs), and UPS Truck Driver (talk · contribs) were all created within minutes of Jeff Albertson, and all became active around the same time yesterday, reverting a few edits to build up to autoconfirmed status. May be worth noting Bubonic plague (talk · contribs), including block log and deleted talk page edits. That said, if you (or any admin who has some idea what's been going on recently) wants to AGF and unblock, you're welcome to. – Luna Santin (talk) 12:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Had to happen

Only to let you know I support this, likely would have done it myself within a few hours. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

From me too - I thought about doing it, but I'm fairly new to all this and didn't want to give the impression I'm picking on the guy ;) EyeSerene^talk 22:06, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Asdfghuiop

Actually the free e-mail account that I signed from at Yahoo.com is the reason why I want my account to be deleted. Aside from being free I have forgotten my passwords and could'nt retrieve them and not only that I also wanted to stop using it.--Asdfghuiop (talk) 03:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 9, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 24	9 June 2008	About the Signpost

Board elections continue	WikiWorld: "Triskaidekaphobia"
News and notes: Military media mention, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Main page day	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) 07:18, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you so much for answering my "Spam" email problem.

Sudarat in NYC —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudarat64 (talk • contribs) 05:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Of course. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 23:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou

Hello again, and many thanks for reverting the daft comment left by yet another JJonz sockpuppet on my talkpage. The things we deal with eh? Best wishes, Lradrama 13:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

And thankyou also for going round and correcting the damage he/she caused by undoing my edits. Much appreciated. Lradrama 13:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Lradrama has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Lradrama 13:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Glad I could help. I had thought that one looked familiar, like somebody I'd run into before, but couldn't recall who they resembled. I'll keep an eye out in case they come back, but feel very free to grab my attention if need be. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:10, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

REVERT

Thanks for the revert of my talk page at one stage it was going back and forwards like a game of tennis Jim Sweeney (talk) 02:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Of course. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 21:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my talk page:-) I appreciate it. How have you been by the way? Long time no see!--SJP (talk) 23:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

US Air Force SERE article.

There was no discussion or notification before this article. Would you consider replacing it and discussing changes or seeing if the claim you made was even true, rather than simply deleting the article without reasonable notification? Niteshift36 (talk) 00:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

The article as originally created was a blatant copyright violation, which is an on-sight deletion criterion (WP:CSD#G12). If you'd to rewrite the article without copyvio, feel free and you'll have my thanks. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Tough to debate it when you have blanked it. Can I ask who had the copyright? As far as I remember, most of it was taken from a US govt. site, which would not be a copyright violation. Niteshift36 (talk) 01:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Admittedly, that is difficult to deal with -- you can't easily review the text, yourself, but you can ask other administrators to have a look, either at deletion review or the village pump. The text was copied from gosere.com; at this point I'm unable to confirm whether the site's material is {{PD-USgov}} but prefer to err on the side of caution until that can be established. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:47, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

The site does claim a copyright, but it is the cadre of the SERE school itself. It is designed for people interested in attending the course or becoming cadre members. It is debateable whether they, as govt. employees, can even hold the material (much of which is directly from govt. sources) as copyrighted. There is case law that disallows federal employees from copyrighting things produced as part of their employment. Even the contact email for the site goes to an official US Air Force email address. In any case, I just feel that the article should have been left in place and perhaps re-written in part, rather than deleted with no notice at all. Niteshift36 (talk) 02:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Hm, fair point, this seems worth review from more than just the two of us. I'd encourage you to submit a request at deletion review (I can help with that if you like). – Luna Santin (talk) 02:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protection of User talk:24.11.209.71?

Seems like a waste of time, recommend semi-protection. Darkspots (talk) 01:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree on the block extension as well--didn't want to seem bloodthirsty by recommending that as well, but this is clearly not an IP that productive edits get made from. Darkspots (talk) 01:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Yep. :) Prefer to avoid semi on user talk, usually, but this user seemed so unlikely to change... – Luna Santin (talk) 01:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Update added to WP:USER

Just wanted to give you a heads-up that I finally got around to adding [4] the stuff we discussed at WP:VPP and your talk page to the WP:USER guideline. --Kralizec! (talk) 14:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Use of seasons to indicate time

I completely accept your comments relating to specific geographical locations. Obviously a reference to summer in New Zealand refers to that period in that country, especially if it about an event which is specifically related to that season. My problem is when it is used in relation to a non-specific location, e.g. we frequently hear about new motion pictures being released 'in the fall'. Given that most films these days are released more or less simultaneously world wide, how do we know when it is happening? (Of course we here in the better half of the world know that 99 times out of a hundred it's the northern fall, but again, it is a less than accurate description.) 203.49.148.66 (talk) 02:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

That is a good point. :x Release dates in particular are frequently pretty vague... best I can think of is proposing the use of quarters instead of seasons, although they don't quite line up perfectly and some people might complain about the conversion if source material specifically names a season. If you haven't already, the village pump or talk pages for the manual of style might be good centralized places to get attention (I might start a thread about this to the VP later tonight, if you haven't yet). – Luna Santin (talk) 03:01, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

User talk:150.101.226.26

I'm obviously not disagreeing with the block, but don't you think you should make it at least somewhat longer? The IP has a long history of vandalism and I don't think 1 hour is going to do a lot of good...   jj137 (talk) 03:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Luna, I just blocked for 1 month--the anonymous editor was right back at it after the hour expired. I welcome a review of the block. Dppowell (talk) 03:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Awhoops, sorry -- was in the middle of a long edit and didn't reload any pages, so missed both of these messages until now. Hadn't taken a close look at contribs prior to today's, but Dppowell's block makes sense now that I have. Thanks to you both. – Luna Santin (talk) 03:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Njection

I dont understand why this article was deleted I read about the company in the NYTimes. I will try to re-post it without it sounding so much like an "advertisement" I guess but I don't see what about it sounded like an ad... Drewhamilton (talk) 01:13, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello. It is my belief that tokyoredlightdistrict.com provides useful information on the topic of Japan prostitution. As it is a useful & on topic link, I saw nothing wrong with updating your links. Have a nice day, I won't edit your page again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.103.91.101 (talk) 09:25, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Xdf3ydrhsdfyhvdgrydb8trury

You beat me to it by about 10 seconds. Gwen Gale (talk) 23:11, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

They didn't seem to be up to much good. I did have a hunch you'd probably block them, too, if you saw it. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 23:22, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Reference

I have only print references, none on the interweb. Wetter Roberson Dies At Midnight (talk) 00:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Sockwatch

Hiya, just ran across your Sockwatch subpages, which I think are a pretty cool idea.  :) I'm currently dealing with MarkBA (talk · contribs) (see Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of MarkBA), who keeps popping up. I'm debating whether I should create a sockwatch page, or add a list of identifiable behaviors onto his category page. Do you have any guidance here? I'm still coming up to speed on dealing with Wikipedia sockpuppets, so any advice would be appreciated.  :) --Elonka 00:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I created those at some point after having trouble keeping track of a vandal who was hitting almost every page maintained by a particular wikiproject; the centerpiece is User:Luna Santin/Sockwatch/X -- the template's located as a subpage so I can call it easily. If you want to use or copy it, feel free. :) I think on some of those subpages, I've added userpages of prominent socks to the listing, both to see if anybody removes relevant tagging and as a guide for others who may want to look into the situation. Most often, I think, the best solution with prolific sockmasters is a combination of checkuser (if possible) and getting more people involved. If somebody keeps at it for a long time, it's sometimes worth listing at Wikipedia:Long term abuse... I admit I tend not to make such listings, but they're sometimes handy if there's a recurring need to get people up to speed quickly. Browsing WP:SSP can be a decent way to learn about these things. I mostly learn as I go, in this area. Finding and identifying socks is usually harder than stopping them, once found, unless they're very persistent. – Luna Santin (talk) 00:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Dreamweaverjack/Trial

Please can you remove this page from Wikipedia, as I set it up as a test page to see how the category tag - Category:Proposed deletion - worked, thanks Dreamweaverjack (talk) 03:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks like somebody beat me to it. When it comes to deleting pages in your userspace, {{db-user}} is frequently an option. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 08:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: your comment on my talkpage

Hi,

Basically, for some reason, Tennis expert seems to find my edits completely unreasonable, even though I am perfectly within my rights to do them, and they do not even radically affect the article anyway. He seems to believe its wrong for me to remove information, but I believe most of what I have deleted is non-notable (Im not sure how much you know about tennis, but if you know quite a lot, wouldnt you agree describing her entire run at a Tier II tournament is completely unnecessary?). He keeps saying I need to wait for consensus from the other editors before putting through what I believe to be a fairly standard edit; for one thing, I thought Wikipedia:Be bold allows me to put through an edit without consensus, and for another, Tennis expert is thus far the only person to register discontent at my edits; the only person to have really chipped into the dispute, Dudesleeper, appears to agree the article needs serious work. I realise vandalism is probably not the right word (I only used that in reference to the fact he had the nerve to call my initial edits vandalism), but I stand by that automatically reverting everything I do to the article is completely unacceptable. He has not even given any proper criticisms of the article, only that it removes information (which, again, Wikipedia:Be bold permits if it improves the article) and I would also like to point out I have attempted to start a discussion about it several times (see the Sharapova discussion page, and his talkpage), and everytime, Tennis expert has responded by either removing my comments or randomly throwing baseless accusations at me.

Wouldnt you agree that what Tennis expert is doing is unacceptable? 92.3.138.123 (talk) 12:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I can see why you're concerned, but prefer to avoid taking sides at the moment -- for now I'm more interested in getting the two of you talking to each other, rather than past each other, if possible. – Luna Santin (talk) 02:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!!

For your assistance during my unblock process. and of course, those kind worda in the admin notice board.--ometzit<col> (talk) 04:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)