User talk:J.delanoy

My wheel-warring policy:

Admins: If you see me make a logged action that you think I should not have done, I will not consider it wheel-warring if you undo it without asking for my permission. However, if I marked the action as being done after running a checkuser query, or as part of a sockpuppet investigation, you should ask me or another checkuser before undoing it. In any case, if you do revert one of my actions, I would appreciate it if you tell me that you did so. Thanks!

Chess, anyone?

Make a move...
View current game and archives

J.delanoy vs. World
Chessboard	Moves
a b c d e f g h 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 a b c d e f g h
	J.delanoy to move...
	# J.delanoy World 1 e4 e6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Bd3 Bb4+ 4 Bd2 Na6 5 a3 Bxd2+ 6 Qxd2 c5 7 Nf3 O-O 8 e5 Nd5 9 Nc3 Nxc3 10 Qxc3 cxd4 11 Nxd4 Qg5 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Battle of Iwo Jima and IP Adress User talk:209.191.217.148

you know the person with the IP Adress User talk:209.191.217.148?Well, If you are an administer, please delete his account because i caught him vandalism on the article Battle of Iwo Jima on the background info. i have posted a message on his talk page (User talk:209.191.217.148) and i don't think he is going to reply back. i have put his page on my watchlist so i can montior him. No i am NOT an amdminister but i you are. Please reply either on your Talk Page or On my talk Page (User talk:Morefight). Thanks! Morefight (talk) 16:43, 7 January 2009 (UTC)Morefight

Possible Lightbot Problem

Lightbot has been removing delinking "meters" in the infoboxes of most television stations and has now started on the radio stations. Should this be stopped, should I revert, what should be done? - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 31, 2008 @ 18:31

Lightbot...and a question

Thanks for re-re-reunblocking Lightbot's IP. Much appreciated. My question...when one clicks on the "edit this page" tab to post a message, they see the green box above with talk page rules, etc. How would one create something like that to be posted only on the "edit this page" tab of the talk page? Take Care...NeutralHomer • Talk • January 3, 2009 @ 16:41

It's called an edit notice. What it does is displays whatever text is contained in Special:MyTalk/Editnotice. Hope that helps. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:43, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikilove

Andy (talk) 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, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!=)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

You keep beating mt to the vandals (as usual)! Andy (talk) 21:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC) PS: What is with the userpage? :D

Man,that's a big number!

150,000? You should start using powers of 10 to express your edits. If you are trolling for compliments, here's a big THANK YOU for your work. 8) Regards, Chuckiesdad 23:12, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Your user page change was vandalism with a name spoof? Didn't know it was possible. My apologies for falling for that, it did seem out of character. Anyway, I really do appreciate your work. Chuckiesdad 23:44, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

No it wasn't vandalism, it was a childish rant on my part. It is, as far as I know, impossible to spoof someone's name on here. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 23:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, I feel less paranoid now. ;) Hey, we are all entitled to act out from time to time, it's good therapy. Chuckiesdad 23:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Mike Riley

Just thought that I'd clear up with you that after deleting the 'wanker' comments someone had made, a friend of mine added that comment

Justice De Thézier

I reverted to IP's edit on that page assuming your revert (that removed the prod) was mistaken. If you did wanted to contest the prod please revert my edit. --Unpopular Opinion (talk) 19:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the intervention on the Tolkien page. I was getting a bit overwhelmed. Could you tell me what is the best way to obtain Rollback rights?--Sulfis (talk) 20:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The best way is to show you know what vandalism is. In the meantime, a tool that you can use to mimic the Rollback feature is Twinkle. Twinkle also automates issuing warnings, WP:AIV reports, and it can tag pages for deletion. If you aren't using Internet Explorer, you should install it. It is very useful. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 20:18, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks--Sulfis (talk) 20:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Review Request

I noticed in the history that you have been editing Battle of Red Cliffs‎. I added a new source and was wondering if you would be interested in reviewing it: [1]. Thank you in advance.--L.H.Summers 77 (talk) 22:16, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

*sigh* sockpuppetry suspect

You blocked but User talk:209.6.144.130‎, but he is already back at [[2]].sinneed (talk) 22:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

IP troll

True to his word, the IP troll is indeed an IP hopper [3]. I also noticed that he vandalised the featured article today. I guess he intends to be the next "penis bandit"! Thought i'd give you the heads up :-) - Cheers! John Sloan (view / chat) 22:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

LOL - Snap with sinneed :D John Sloan (view / chat) 22:46, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

We are quick. He is bragging about it here. [[4]]sinneed (talk) 22:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Other IP blocked for evasion. I can play this game all night. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 22:56, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Per this, you're right! Maybe semi-protecting the page might be in order? Since he's already said he has no plans to make an unblock request and he could resort to making silly ones once he realised we arn't responding to him anymore. As you said, he likes wasting peoples time! Cheers John Sloan (view / chat) 00:10, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Nah. He wants attention. You were giving it to him, and if I protected the page, it would make him happy. As long as he is not being abusive, just let him go. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 00:13, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough :-) - Also:

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Your "funny list" is hillarius. Because it gave me as many laughs as an episode of Harry Hill's TV Burp, I award you this Barnstar of good humour! John Sloan (view / chat) 00:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Happy editing! John Sloan (view / chat) 00:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

...for fixing my Rfa thanks page. It looks a lot nice now! :) --Cameron* 11:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem :-) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi there,

I hope that I am adding this in the correct place - apologies if I am not.

I received a "Vandalising" warning, but I consider what I have added as being valuable. I do not want to be blocked from editing pages in the future, so would like to know why my external links are not acceptable. Thank you, I will appreciate your input.

~A —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.140.228.133 (talk) 17:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

For a link to an external website to be included in a Wikipedia article, it has to add something that mere text could not. From what I could tell, you were only adding a link to try to advertise. You should know that all (read: 100%) external links on Wikipedia articles have nofollow tags, so search engine will ignore them. Thus having links on Wikipedia will not increase a page's rank in search engine results. More information can be found in Wikipedia's external link policy. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:05, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. For the record, I could not care less about google rankings. I added two things that I believe would be public interest 1) a unique patented machine and 2) trademark law FAQ page - which I know many find to be extremely useful. Can you tell me which one of these was inappropriate and more clearly why? Thanks again, A —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.140.228.133 (talk) 18:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I have not yet received your response, but have now noticed that my link to a Canadian Trademark Law FAQ page has been removed from 1) Trademarks 2) Canadian Trademark Law. How does that make sense? This is extremely useful information - if you visit the FAQ page (http://www.crollco.com/FAQs.php HERE) you will see that it is highly relevant - it summarizes the information that people seek under these search terms on wikipedia - I have simply chosen to list a link rather than re-type all of the information into the body of the wiki page. I feel that I deserve further explanation as to why I have gone to the trouble of adding this information for other people's benefit only to have it removed. I apologize for the tone, but I am not pleased. ~A —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.140.228.133 (talk) 05:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Dnepropetrovsk maniacs

As a regular patroller of recent changes on Wikipedia, please could you add Dnepropetrovsk maniacs to your watchlist. A serious issue arose over this article during the last few days, see Talk:Dnepropetrovsk maniacs. The link involved here is currently the subject of a XLinkBot revert, see User:XLinkBot/RevertList. Thanks, --♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:54, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Fast Reverts + Adopt-a-user Programme

Your rollbacks and reverts for vandals are inspiring! Each time I try to correct something, I see you've already done it! How do you work so fast?

I've only been on wikipedia for a fortnight, but immediately I think my real interests are in reverting and rollbacks. So I wanted to ask you if you were involved in the Adopt-a-user programm? I think a user such as yourself would be good at teaching me the basics of wikipedia, including how to easily spot vandalism, which is something I'm not very good at!

Thankyou for taking the time to read this,

²wenty³ (talk) 19:10, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey TwentyThree!

I go so fast because I am using a software tool called Huggle to help me.

I'm not in the adopt-a-user program, mostly because, frankly, I stink at trying to teach people stuff. Sorry. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 20:18, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi there

Time to ban 209.189.130.83 as they cant seem to leave Lance Armstrong alone...

I've started patrolling RC and I'm a good friend of User:Jake Wartenberg who I'm sure you know —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aarondoucett (talk • contribs) 20:18, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Already done, thanks. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 20:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

You are, indeed, the man!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You seem to be one of the most active and diligent RC patrollers on Wikipedia today. Nine times out of ten, when I revert vandalism, it goes to a revision where you reverted vandalism! Te vides omnis! PumeleonT 22:28, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Heh, yeah. Huggle is pretty awesome :-) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 22:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Just curious

I noticed you reverted vandalism on both Michael Vick and Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis. Is it just a coincidence that we both watch these pages? --Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, huggle. I see. Never mind. I'm new and thus curious.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Weird day

Today is indeed a very weird day...was just about to award you this:

File:Allaroundamazingbarnstar3.png		All Around Amazing Barnstar
		For your excellent abilities in combatting vandalism, nonsense pages, and all-around WikiImprovement, I hereby award you this barnstar. Enjoy! Cheers, —Mizu onna sango15Hello! 02:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC).

...when I saw that you gave me a barnstar. Very odd, though this isn't the first time something like this happened. :-) Thanks for the award, enjoy yours! Cheers, —Mizu onna sango15^Hello! 02:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC).

lol! That's awesome! Thanks! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 02:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem! Thanks again for the shiny. :-) —Mizu onna sango15^Hello! 02:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Made this just for you

		The "Chin-up" barnstar
		Yes, you are being repeatedly abused and attacked, but chin-up old bean, we're behind you all the way Jac16888 (talk) 03:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

This is for clogging up my watchlist with all that grawp crap--Jac16888 (talk) 03:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :-) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 03:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Protection?

Maybe you should consider move-protecting this page J.delanoy? I'm surprised you haven't done it already TBH. Happy editing :-) John Sloan (view / chat) 04:02, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I was hoping he would focus on this page instead of the mainspace. I guess not. Protected now. Cheers! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 04:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

IP warning

'( You could have let me at least have given him an ARV! :P JK. (Psst: I see why you use Huggle now; I used it yesterday at the local Starbucks, and I got sooo many rvv!) Sincerely, Imperat§ r^(Talk) 15:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

hehe. Cluebot reported him, and ping !admin in #cvn-wp-en, so I blocked. Good work with your vandal-fighting. I see you around all the time (How do you beat me with Twinkle when I'm using Huggle?) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 15:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, evils of Special:RecentChanges! Besides, I refresh it every few seconds. :P BTW, mind giving me a WP:ER? No-one's responded for (around) a week! Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 15:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Epilepsy

Wondering if we could add a page protection to epilepsy as high volume of vandalism.--Doc James (talk) 17:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It was pretty much all the same user, so I don't think the page needs to be protected. Thanks, though. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:40, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Huggle

Hi, I am using the Huggle software and wondered as you are an admin if it is recommended or if it is frowned upon when you are applying to become a sysop. I am not looking to become one yet but was wondering if it puts you on a downhill slope or not? Corruptcopper (talk) 18:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, assuming you are doing a good job with it, not making mistakes and so forth, Huggle really doesn't have much effect. What really matters is, what are you doing other than using Huggle? Someone else asked me a similar question a while ago, so I'll copy my reply to them:

Based on my observations, people at RFA do not generally take into account the raw percentage of edits made with automated tools, because tools (especially Huggle) skew everything so radically. You can make thousands upon thousands of edits in a very short time using Huggle. I once made 3452 edits in one day - a calender day to boot, not merely a 24-hour period (some have been deleted in the interval, but you get the idea). At the same time, it is not impossible to write a featured article from scratch with less than 150 edits, including the FAC.

The thing people tend to look at with vandal-fighters is not so much "OMGZ!!!1!! 86% of his edits were made with Huggle.", but "OK, he uses Huggle. Cool. Does this guy also know how to write? Does he do anything other than fight vandalism?" If you had 50000 edits, and ~43000 of them were with Huggle, but your other 7000 edits included a GA and/or an FA, and maybe a couple of DYKs, you would sail through RFA. (assuming the rest - behavior, clue, interaction - pans out OK) In that case, your automated tools would likely propel you towards success, since by writing FAs and fighting vandalism, you demonstrate interest in an unusually wide spectrum of the project. Most people (myself included) find this nearly impossible to do, so when someone who can do it stands at RFA, the result is generally not difficult to foresee.

Hope that helps. Cheers! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes this does help thanks very much for taking the time out to explain it to me. I will remember what you have said and take it into account. Also could you maybe if you have time go over the edits that I am making with huggle to make sure that I am not doing any wrong. What I am doing is looking at it reading it and reverting if it is vandalism or doesnt make any sence. Corruptcopper (talk) 18:26, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Another thing I could do with is IP block exemption on my account as I keep getting caught up in hardblocks and also global blocks through college IP. Corruptcopper (talk) 19:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, I don't mean to be rude, but without seeing you requesting unblock from one of these blocks on your talk page, I am hesitant to grant it to you. If it has been happening, and you just didn't bother to request unblock, you should ask a checkuser for help, since checkusers can see the IP address or addresses that you have edited from. A few of checkusers I have asked for help from in the past are Rlevse, Luna Santin, Jayvdb, and Lar. Or you can look at Special:ListUsers/checkuser for a full list, but keep in mind that some of the people there rarely, if ever, edit. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:48, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the information and also thanks for reverting the vandalism to my userpage and talk. I will request it when I am in college tommorow if I have the time. I understand why you are hesitant to hand it out as it is a very powerful tool. Corruptcopper (talk) 19:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Request

Hi J.delanoy, could you please handle the report against Special:Contributions/66.142.195.205 at WP:AIV? He is in the middle of a massive vandalism spree! Thanks John Sloan (view / chat) 18:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, it has been dealt with! Thanks anyway. :-) John Sloan (view / chat) 18:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:Readin

To J.Delanoy! Please stop accusing me of vandalism when the real culprit is User:Readin, he has a history of edit warring and POV-pushing. Check his history if you're in doubt. A word of caution, if you continue to support User:Readin and treat me unequally I will consider that to be a hypocritical double standard by which you, yourself, will be held accountable with full responsibility. Note: your administrator status is not perpetual nor is it permanent, but rather is contingently based on your continued UNBIASED regulatory efforts for the promotion and augmented maximization of accurate and POV-free encyclopedic articles. Thank you!

I accused you of vandalism because you removed my comments declining your request on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. If you disagree with me, you are free to request that another administrator reviews your case, but you should not remove my comments. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, removing someone's administrator rights is not impossible, but it is extremely difficult. I do not imagine that your implied threat holds much force. In any case, I can guarantee you that those pages will not be unprotected, because there is simply too much vandalism on them when they are unprotected. If you want to edit them, you can do so very easily. Any registered user account that is at least four days old and has made at least ten edits can edit through semi-protection. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Tess of the d'Urbervilles

The next time you wish to make a reversion, I suggest you check the discussion page. You reverted my edit which was intended to remove OR, was in consensus, and was sourced (as opposed to the part removed). I asked that you either revert your reversion or make an argument for keeping OR and a blatantly inaccurate description of the novel. 68.73.80.211 (talk) 19:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I saw "rape" on the page and I wasn't paying attention. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I apologized on his talk page and struck out the Level two warning I've given him. Willking1979 (talk) 19:39, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Tess of the d'Urbervilles

An IP user claims that his/her edits regarding the article were not vandalism, citing the talk page. Both of us used Huggle. Your thoughts? Willking1979 (talk) 19:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I see that the user has a response above. Willking1979 (talk) 19:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Citation...

Why do you simply delete stuff when at the very most you probably should have stuck a "citation needed" or "original research?" tag? That's just being lazy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.231.64.36 (talk) 20:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Multiple related vandalism from several Anon IP's

First apologies for dropping this in your lap! But having noted you have put a 12 month block on an Anon IP that has come up in a pattern of vandalism I have been following through I arrived at your User Page, read it and thought it reasonably safe to do so! ;o) So here it is:-

You have blocked 221.117.125.156 as an open proxy used for vandalism. If you take a look at the contributions of the anons listed below you will note a pattern is emerging on the style used by the one you blocked and I suspect these may all be the same person.

There is far too much coincidence from the edit summaries and the same articles targeted, with the wording "Hi. Good site." by them, with other articles added, probably to help create confusion. This is backed up by a quick look at the article histories I have enboldened.

I did notice a pattern of odd edits after spotting vandalism to a minor article on my local watchlist and commented on it on the article talk page Talk:Paddock, Huddersfield. As User:219.53.101.12 has also done an identical edit to the Paddock, Huddersfield article today the trail eventually led to your block of 221.117.125.156, via Ladder from 219.53.101.12. I have gone a bit 'Geeky' and placed the anons spotted so far on the left and their vandalism contributions to the right to show the pattern. It could go on further, but enough is enough!

69.246.44.22 - Comment, User:Nirajrm/Signhere

82.98.84.240 - Gero-Informatics, Template:Pagelist/doc, Addition-chain exponentiation, Template:Earth Labelled Map

60.216.45.10 - User:Tompw/bookshelf, Vanity (performer), Books & Co., Addition-chain exponentiation, User:Sj/Newpages, Template:Pagelist/doc

203.110.240.22 - Wikipedia:Peer review/Board of directors/archive1, Comment, Fashion show, Vanity (performer), Reply, Addon, Guestbook, Add-drop multiplexer

125.46.33.175 - Reply

201.47.187.245 - Reply, Formal, MSG, NY, Formal

66.186.237.190 - MSG, NY

221.233.197.140 - MPS (format), Subpage, PAGES, User:Nirajrm/Signhere, Supergrass (informer), Fashion show, Strut (fashion show), Reply, Ladder theory, Formal

222.180.17.45 - Signed, Sealed, and Delivered, Ladder theory, First Message, Buch (surname), Formal, Scrapbooking

78.107.16.68 - Dashboard Confessional, MPS (format)

202.44.4.85 - Supergrass (informer), MediaWiki talk:Fancycaptcha-addurl, Ladder (Go), Val Guest

58.4.70.106 - Ladder (Go)

84.103.63.130 - Val Guest

116.118.198.131 - Saddam Hussein - United States relations, Supergrass (informer)

192.82.0.204 - Paddock, Huddersfield, Saddle-billed Stork, User:Nirajrm/Signhere

221.13.32.99 - User:Tompw/bookshelf, Saddle-billed Stork

87.111.11.251 - User:Tompw/bookshelf

80.73.85.27 - Ladder

61.91.165.99 - Addition-chain exponentiation

219.53.101.12 - Paddock, Huddersfield, Paddock, Message-passing method, Ladder, Comment

221.117.125.156 - Saddam Hussein - United States relations, wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football Clubs/page name, Ladder, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Page, Addition-chain exponentiation, Template talk:Usercomment

To me they (all the IP's) appear to cross reference to each other via the histories and no doubt others will come up in the next few hours. Please tell me I'm right and not turning into a conspiracy theorist! Richard Harvey (talk) 20:52, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll check them to see if they're proxies. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 20:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Quite a few of these were proxies, but most were already blocked by User:Slakr by the time I got to them. Thanks for going through the trouble to gather all that information. That must have taken a while. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 03:02, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

No Problem! My eyes have almost fully shrunk back into their sockets. ;o) Richard Harvey (talk) 08:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Here is another one I missed from the 3rd:- 83.137.228.66 Add-in Express. Richard Harvey (talk) 15:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

bot made a mistake in Blue_(programming_language)

Hi -- If I'm understanding correctly, your bot reverted an edit I made to Blue_(programming_language), apparently because its automated criteria made my edit seem like vandalism. I reverted the bot's edit and posted on the article's talk page.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 21:13, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't a bot, it is a fully-controlled automated tool. I told it to undo that revert, but apparently, it didn't. Sorry. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 21:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Aw, shucks.

Looks like I made a friend. Thanks for blocking this latest attempt to ruffle my feathers.  :) I gotta run; could you please keep an eye on the new user log? Children like this invariably have dynamic IPs. Thanks, bro. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:59, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Already doing. I blocked another one earlier when a bot on IRC pinged it. If it gets out of hand, I'll ask a checkuser if a rangeblock is feasible. Keep up the good work! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 03:00, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

You betcha. Thanks for everything. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Alan Feinstein

Prod tag added. You had edited (actually fought vandals, I suspect) on this article, and I thought it a nice thing to notify you. The article still has no RS, reads like an ad, and I am not inclined to call him "notable." Thanks! Collect (talk) 12:10, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

J DELANOY Please restore the page i posted.

The previous edit of that page was an unclear, confusing explanation of how the michelson morley experiment could prove the existence of SPACETIME, not a fucking LUMINOUS AETHER that some dummy invented to dumb down the huge importance of experiments like the michelson morley inferometer experiment. You could have read it more than once and tried to think a little objectively and do your research dude. PLease respond to me, i plan to send an email to wikipedia's staff to make sure idiots cant cause problems for people who are trying to make a difference in our world today. TRY AND GIVE SOME CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM MR OBJECTIVE THINKER. If you can prove that the edit that was on before was at all educational or at all productive compared to mine i'll give you 100 bucks.

By the way i'm willing to have a more personal, more constructive discussion if you wanna get in contact on the phone instead of trying to make constructive criticisms on a message board.

- [personal info redacted by User:Iridescent] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cabfare123 (talk • contribs)

This is an encyclopedia, not a message board. There is no possible way "I am a first year university student at the university of guelph in ontario, canada. Get in contact with me if you have any questions or if you know anything interesting that you want to discuss with someone who will listen to you and take you seriously. Join in with me on my 'quest for knowledge'. email [redacted] and we'll get in contact. I'm trying to start a movement towards educating the people in the western world about the world they live in, and stressing the capabilities of human ingenuity(science) instead of being distracted by the world of Apple, Microsoft, News Media and political strategies." was an appropriate addition to one of our articles. – iridescent 17:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The edit you made that I undid removed a large portion of well-written content, which explained what it meant to "measure aether". You replaced it with a frankly ridiculous, and extremely poorly written, passage rambling on at length to state that the theory of "luminous aether" (What is "luminous aether" anyways? The word you are looking for is "luminiferous". "Luminous" aether would mean that the aether itself was emitting light.) is incorrect and was supplanted largely by Einstein's theory of the space-time continuum outline in his general theory of relativity. (Which, by the way, the general theory of relativity has not been "proven" either. It merely provides the best known explanation for observed phenomena.) The fact that general relativity is the accepted explanation for the behaviour of light is already noted at the end of the article. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Havent you read that this experiment has nothing to do with a luminous aether anymore. People realise now, with eitstein's incredibly interesting and reasonable quantum and relativity theories that this experiment is not being used to disprove/prove the existence of a luminous aether, but to prove the existence of gravitational waves in spacetime and to give our most credible, respectable scientific theory(quantum) even more credibility and in doing so, take another step towards the enlightenment of humanity. Have you ever looked up all of massive scale inferometers being built all over the world?. We(Scientists) now know that the only reason that michelson and morley's experiment did not work is because they never had a hypothesis(besides this luminous aether theory mentioned in the introduction to the wikipedia site) as to what could be causing the inexplicable behavior(periodic fluctuations) in the 'flow of aether'(now recognized as the fluctuation of spacetime, or gravitational waves. The reason it hasnt been totaly proven yet is because we havent built an inferometer of the necessary accuracy and size to convince people that the behavior of light explored by this experiment is actually another step forward in quantum theory, and another step away from superstition and ignorance and towards science and knowledge and understanding and enlightenment of the whole of humanity. Religion ancd blind faith is not the way to enlightenment and salvation after a life of sins anymore. Dont worry about it. Science is the path to enlightenment and salvation and all i was trying to do by editing the michelson morley experiment page was to do my fucking part.

We gotta help eachother do our parts. Youre an administrator. Talk to some people, spread the desire for knowledge, instead of the desire to edit any wiki edit that seems the slightest bit absure/contradictory to the norm. Einstein was absurd/contradictory to the norm.....

-David O'Clereigh. University of guelph - E-mail removed

I DID NOT DO ANY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU LISTED AS POSSIBLE REASONS FOR YOU TO DELETE MY PAGE!!!!\

- WHO DO YOU THINK!!! duh - david oclereigh

Um, yes you did. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Also note, as per Wikipedia:Verifiability, that Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. Even if what you are writing happens to be true, it needs verification from an independent, reliable source. Useight (talk) 18:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

relish-tastic

i am sorry sir but i do not believe it is not constructive to add that relish is in fact, "condiment-tastic" i agree that my first edit was stupid but my second one just added a crucial fact. anyway thank you for reading my letter, and i hope you can see that this misunderstanding-tastic can be ended in a fun-tastic way Tmh48 (talk) 18:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Comedian's Name

How is putting a comedians name on wikipedia vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.175.88.247 (talk) 18:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

• J. appears to be busy, I can field this one. The name would have to be notable. John Q. Comedian wouldn't be listed, but George Carlin would. If the person is notable (ie: well-known, has albums, etc.), then they are added to Wikipedia. Hope this helps. - NeutralHomer • Talk • January 7, 2009 @ 18:59

Thank you

I hope that I'm doing this right/

The Guidance Barnstar

		The Guidance Barnstar
		Thank you very much for helping me understand the culture of Wikipedia and how to proceed during a very difficult time. Your help was invaluable. Kallimina (talk) 23:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm sorry it ended up happening like it did. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 23:31, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

thanks for deleting the page,. I dont have andy idea how to delet blank pages... thx again —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khazert (talk • contribs) 02:43, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem :-) You have to be an administrator to delete pages. If you need to get a page deleted in the future that you created, you can just put {{db-author}} on it rather than removing all the text. The db-author with the curly braces will attract the attention of administrators, who will delete it for you. Cheers! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 02:46, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Question

Hello! I was just wondering if you had a suggestion as where I can go to get some of my Angel questions answered, as it appears that they are not allowed on wikipedia for it is not a forum. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.75.192 (talk) 02:52, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

You might try asking on the reference desk. You can ask pretty much anything there. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 02:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)w

Odd spam

Am I nuts, or is this just about the strangest placement of spam ever? Did he actually read the topic of article? :) Kuru ^talk 03:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

lol! "Must...insert...links...EVERYWAIR!!!!!!!!!!!!!" J.delanoy^gabs_adds 03:30, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh...my...lord...

Have you just stopped using Huggle? 0_0 o_0 The end of the world is coming! D= :P Nice losing your addiction....Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 14:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:10, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

09:41, 8 January 2009 (hist) (diff) m White separatism ‎ (Reverted edits by Witticism (talk) to last version by Will Beback) (top) [rollback] [rollback] [vandalism] and et cetera. BTW, how did you manage to get the message when you edit? You know, the green banner... Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 19:09, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, all those rollbacks. That was someone with a lot of vandalism, so I just opened their contribs and Ctrl-clicked all the rollback links. To get a notice like that when someone edits your talk page, go to Special:MyTalk/Editnotice. To get one for your userpage, go to Special:MyPage/Editnotice. Cheers! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Ahh...thanks! Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 19:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Est-ce possible ?

Hello, person who knows cool things I don't! Is it possible to do something to a template like Template:Copyvio so that it will let people know when it is being substituted onto a "file" that it should not be? If you do not know, do you have any suggestions on who might? If you do, do you have any suggestions on how to go about getting that done? Images that are potential infringement should be listed at WP:PUI (presuming they don't meet WP:CSD reasoning). --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:06, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is possible. I'll see if I can get it to work. So far, I've had some success, but I can't figure out one thing. I'll show you what it looks like when I'm done. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:46, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I really appreciate your help, and I'm so sorry for dropping it on your lap. :) If I ever ask for help with something, and you don't have time, please feel free to say, "Yes, it's possible, but I'm busy. Why not ask this guy?" --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. On second thought, I'd better not ask him. Evidently, he has history. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

hahahahahahaha! Oh, man! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

What a coincidence, huh? Anyway, as I said (in more words) at my talk page: genius! Seems perfect. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:06, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Leeway for IP editors?

Hello, I saw that you just blocked User:70.164.48.6, someone I had just given a first offense warning to. I am a little confused. How much leeway are we supposed to give IP editors when warning for vandalism? Put another way: since IP addresses can be dynamic, how much time should we allow to elapse before starting with a level one warning instead of escalating to the next level. Thank you, 20:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC) LovesMacs (talk) 20:45, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. Huggle, which is a very popular vandalism reverting tool, considers warnings stale after 48 hours, so usually I go with that. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 21:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Baconian theory article reversion

Sorry my friend but I really think you should learn about the issues involved before blindly reverting. Mark Anderson's book ia a propagandist Oxfordian book and has no place in the Baconian theory article. It does not appear there by consensus and was put there unilaterally by the Oxfordian Smatprt. JeffersonT02 (talk) 21:45, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I make a lot of reverts, so I am not sure what you are talking about. Can you give me a link? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 21:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Jefferson was probably referring to this edit. GlassCobra 22:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

For some of your recent reverts. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 22:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Congrats

		The Writer's Barnstar
		I wish to acknowledge your tireless work in reverting vandalism on Wikipedia. South Bay (talk) 00:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I try to do my best ;-) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 00:23, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

XVID

I would like to request abritration/protection of the article from user User_talk:J._M., whose arbitrary deletes of content, based of broken logic, are also accompanied by blocking of my IP addresses as a method of discussion. Note that the content he is repeatedly removing is not even mine, it's just that I'm afraid his reasoning has nothing to do with Wikipedia, rather than personal ego. And again, Mr. J.M. is not particularly very polite in his responses. I don't have a whole day to deal with his deletes, I'm just concerned that these actions destroy Wikipedia as a useful tool. Thanks in advance. 208.86.143.84 (talk) 00:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)