User talk:Ricky81682/Archive 7

Tip of the moment... Featured world of Wikipedia While browsing through Wikipedia, you may have clicked on Featured content from the left menu. Featured content represents the best of Wikipedia, including articles, pictures, and other contributions that showcase excellent results of the collaborative efforts of Wikipedia. Here is the list for each of these features. Featured content: Featured articles Featured lists Featured pictures On Wikimedia Commons Featured portals Featured topics Prior tip – Tips library – Next tip Become a Wikipedia tipster To add this auto-randomizing template to your user page, use {{totd-random}}

Pinoy Roadies

Ricky81682, you have nominated my entry for deletion. I will no longer contest that, but once the other press release has been aired, may i re-post this article again with proper sources, or will it violate rules in wikipedia?

Thanks! User:Janixpacle —Preceding undated comment added 06:58, 1 September 2009 (UTC).

I will just userify it into my subpage until there are adequate sources. Thanks! User:Janixpacle —Preceding undated comment added 07:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC).

I got this message after i moved it: This template is being used in the wrong namespace. how do i fix that? --Janixpacle (talk) 07:19, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Souvlaki Album

Hi Ricky81682,

You said
I think we should copy anything new over and make it a redirect.

Yes, that's a great idea.
I went ahead and added the information to Souvlaki_(album)
Go ahead and clean this up, but please retain all the factual information.
You can set the Souvlaki_(2005_Castle_Music_re-issue) page to redirect there.

Thanks for asking!
J_Tom_Moon_79 (talk) 17:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Croatia in Union with Hungary

I have asked Squash_Racket to remove himself from further discussion because he has been writing false statements which are in clear contradiction with sources which he is using.

Like evidence I will use his first statement in article Croatia in personal union with Hungary. My first statement is writen against copyright rules because words are taken word by word from his source. Second his statement which I have changed is again having smaller problem which has been discussed on pacta conventa talk page so again it is no mistake, but this is not important.

I do not want blocking or anything similar, but only that he is removed from futher discussion about this--Rjecina (talk) 16:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Rjecina completely removed the Oxford University Press, Manchester University Press, Cambridge University Press references and the country study of the Library of Congress. That was basically vandalism, that's the issue here?

If you cite several sentences, you have to change the text a bit to avoid copyright violation. The first sentence always contains the title of the article which Rjecina has just removed. I don't think I changed the meaning of the sentence at all

"The events surrounding the union of Croatia and Hungary" -> "The concept of <article title>" That's the big deal?

With the third revert he removed these:

Croatian historians argue that the union was a personal one in the form of a shared king while Hungarian and Serbian historians insist that Croatia was conquered. The significance of the debate lies in the Croatian claim to an unbroken heritage of historical statehood which is clearly compromised by the other claim.

I found both of these sentences in the reference, so I have no idea what Rjecina is talking about. He only removed the Hungarian and Serbian point of view, because he didn't like it.

Further problems: R. added an awful lot of tags in the article Royal Hungary instead of adding a single "unreferenced" or "refimprove" tag at the top. Reason: R. is "tired of attacks by hungarian users on article about Croatian history", which to me seems like a classic case of WP:POINT. (Sidenote:I only remember editing the "Pacta Conventa" and the "Croatian in union with Hungary" articles, both of which are obviously Hungary-related.)

Further problems: Rjecina is systematically attacking every single reference that he doesn't like across pages, while treats every single book that contains at least a passing reference supporting his point of view with the utmost respect. For example that book is too "short" for him, although that is a 309 pages long Cambridge University Press reference and R. was even citing it to me(!) one and a half hours earlier.

And after all that Rjecina reports me? He adds requests about who should be "removed" and who not? Squash Racket (talk) 17:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

After seeing your "nice" work I have removed all your edits to situation of 10 March and then you have reverted and after that I have started to scream about false statement (short version of events)--Rjecina (talk) 17:21, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I think removing Oxford University Press, Manchester University Press, Cambridge University Press references and the country study of the Library of Congress without concensus is simply vandalism, so my edit wasn't a revert. What R. means by "nice work" is called copyright violation. Squash Racket (talk) 17:42, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

That's true, but I thought when an article was basically unreferenced, we'd just add the proper template at the top. We use inline tags for specific problems on some points of the article. And we don't announce on the talk page "Because I do not want to play defensive any more, maybe is time to solve few questions about Hungarian history:" which generates the "right" climate for a proper discussion. Squash Racket (talk) 05:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Seattle Sounders FC

Hey, no worries. It was a whole lot of silliness.Cptnono (talk) 03:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Evenmoremotor, Marino Mannoia and Gentile

Hi, thanks for your comments on Talk:Francesco Marino Mannoia. According to Italian law the copyright on the image has expired. In other words a link is legitimate. But I leave it up to you, I don't want to get blocked again for violating 3RR. By the way, I don't quite understand why I was blocked and Evenmoremotor not, that is not fair in my opinion. This guy is driving me nuts, yet another zealot on a crusade. He does not respond to anyone who is questioning his behaviour, just look at his Talk page -- or rather the history of his Talk page, because he deletes every criticism on his actions. Another issue I have with this guy is the reference to the date of birth and death of Nicola Gentile. I tried to explain to him that although this particular site might be considered self-published media, it is the only one that is available. It is there so that anyone can see the source and assess the reliability themselves and not let him decide for them. The date of birth and death have been the issue of debate, that is why I decided to put it there, although I am also not particularly keen on these kinds of sites. However, sometimes they do offer correct information. I would appreciate if you could restore the reference. Like I said, I don't want to be blocked again. By the way, please don't remove the information in Marino Mannoia now that it is unreferenced. It is correct and can be verified in the sources that are mentioned at the end of the article. Sorry for the long rant. - Mafia Expert (talk) 17:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

FYI, User:Evenmoremotor is likely to be the same person as User:Mynameisstanley, who has been banned from editing. He is also likely to be be User:Madeveryotherday and User:Treesheads. I asked for a check at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mynameisstanley and this is the result. - Mafia Expert (talk) 11:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

It took me a while to figure it out. The thing we should learn is that he will be back sometime somewhere. - Mafia Expert (talk) 21:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for your message - hopefully I won't do anything to substantiate your concerns! Best, Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 12:59, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Tiramisoo sock

Since you blocked this user for sockpuppeting, I figured I'd bring it up that he's created another, self-admitted sock using the name TiramiNew. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 08:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Dan Schlund

The decision to delete the article Dan Schlund is now being reviewed. You have been sent this message because you have previously been involved in the AfD discussion(s) concerning this article. If you are interested in the review discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 April 3. Thank you. Esasus (talk) 15:52, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

• and more detailed information about off-line sources are now posted on the talk page. Hobit (talk) 15:33, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Lyssa Chapman

How can facts about someone be copyrighted. Also the text is not a word for word copy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.138.2 (talk)

Thanks for reinstating it. Now lets hope another administrator does not wield their axe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.138.2 (talk) 19:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

User:CharlesRKiss

Since you've blocked this user, you may want to also block Charlesrkiss (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), as this account, obviously an alt, is continuing to edit after your block of the primary.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 04:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Correction: the alt has (as of now) not edited after the block of the other account, but you may still want to block it. Awickert (talk) 18:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for you actions concerning this highly disruptive editor. --Skyemoor (talk) 15:25, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello, thank you for letting me know TruHeir (talk) 18:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your message

Thank you for the message on my images. I was not the user to upload the top hat photo, but I did upload all the other images. I have permission for use of them all & I can send copies anywhere needed. I just don't know what I need to do in order to make them all OK.

I did not get written permission of use for the top hat photo, but I have spoke with the photogropher, Dirk Mai, and he has given permission for all of his work to be used on the Clint Catalyst article.

I am kinda taking things slow on here for now, I am sure you understand. But I do appreciate the help and I'll do what I can to keep the images up, just let me know. I think they are a nice addition to the article, most importantly, The Cottonmouth Kisses book cover. Tallulah13 (talk) 03:08, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Planecrash111

A more apt user ID, I have seldom seen. "Time to protect the talk page?" In my non-admin opinion... YES. Or at least disable the user's capability of editing it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 08:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

AGF here, I believe he was referring to Baseball games, as he was editing articles with information during an on-going game.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 08:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I would like to give him another chance, at least in terms of messages on his talk page. IMO, he needs to give a better explanation on why his edits are bad. They're bad because wikipedia is not for play-by-play game info. During or after a game, he needs to understand this, and right now, it doesn't appear as if he does.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 08:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Umm.. I can't.. I don't have that ability.. at least I don't have it yet. Maybe some time in the distant future, but right now, I can't. I'm just a user with rollback rights.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 10:15, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Planecrash111 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) If you check his contrib's list, you'll see that it's littered with pointy, snippy, personal-attack comments, such as calling established users "vandals". The core problem has been he's getting into blog-like minutia on these players, and of course other users keep reverting him, telling him why, and he won't listen. He's also branched into other areas. Look at the edit summary on this one. [1] Here's a personal opinion, and you can call it a personal attack if you want, but I'm just quoting Barney Fife - "He's a boob!" Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 10:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Bosnian player's CoB "Yugoslavia

I've explained much earlier to the two or three editor's who are taking this way too far, that according to all diplomatic record's and valid/current documentation they were born in Bosnia and Herzegovina vice SFRY. While I understand their point of view, it is by any and all means incorrect in today's world. Furthermore, there are ten's of reference's if not hundred's indicating Bosnia and Herzegovina as their country of birth, I've provided the NY Times article as one of them. What's even more ludicrous that we've now come to this point about this senseless and oxymoron topic is that each player's personal website indicates their country of birth as Bosnia and Herzegovina vice SFRY. Lastly, the definition of country of birth does not only mean the federally controlled boundaries of a nation, but it is also defined as "... any state, ...".

Thank you for the message on my page and thank you for your time.--Alem Hadzic (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm glad that you took his point into account which might I add contradicts his stand in the first place. It was I who pointed out to him the Soviet Union issue and he basically regurgitated it on my page.--Alem Hadzic (talk) 04:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps your input at this point, can pull the discussion out of a stalemate. I've cited the rule now and that doesn't satisfy the one editor. Thank you for your contribution.--Stlunatic071 (talk) 22:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess ignoring the issue will solve the problem, is that your take?--Stlunatic071 (talk) 08:05, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Was I Hacked???

Hi, A bad surprise when I open wikipedia for consult and find a warn about a supposed vandalization did by my IP The problem is that I open wiki for the first time today and I'm sure that I didn't visit the Latin America page What it could be? 189.62.142.36 (talk) 03:13, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

RedRose333

RedRose333 (talk · contribs) continues to make unnecessary deletions, with no discussion or edit summary, including this one after your most recent warning. Ward3001 (talk) 00:11, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to report the same thing. I guess it's about time? --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 00:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess this is not what we wanted, is it? --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 14:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

X-Y relations

You contributed to [2], what do you make out of Canvasback (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), especially this: [3]? --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 00:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Darren M. Jackson

Keep your alans on mate, i'm not ranting, I wrote the bloody artcile, not you, plus i'll write/edit where ever I feel thank you, and ranting is not a reason to block some one, if you keep threatening me, your find yourself blocked.--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 15:26, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I've got a better idea. How about no one gets blocked and instead we write an encylopedia? Theresa Knott | token threats 22:07, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah thats a good idea, where shall we start, i'm up for it, any one want to help on some Romany projects, I have a project I would like to start on, it's Jimmy Stockin bare knuckle fighter.

There is a list of bare knuckle fighters on wiki, with no bio, maybe we could work on that. Alans back on, dummy picked up and lets go to work lol.--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 08:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I didnt mean you any way lmao--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 10:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

If you didn't mean him then you shouldn't be saying on his talk page! Ricky has stated that he wants to step back, so it's best to talk to me on my talk page rather than his. Theresa Knott | token threats 09:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

COPYRIGHT

Yes you can delete that all. --Secaundis • (myTalk) • (myContribs) 08:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

!Xam Khomani Heartland

I need help to change the spelling of !Xam to /Xam - see note 1 in my recent edit of this page. ! is a particular click in the Khoisan languages which is different from /. ! is correct for !Kung or !Xun but wrong for /Xam. All the best Blarcrean (talk) 20:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Beach Strip.jpg

Sorry about tagging it again! I didn't see that you'd already deleted the local page as I was tagging it for deletion. I ended creating the page again. Radiant chains (talk) 04:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Free (Dani Harmer song)

Y Deleted, thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

ANI notification

Thank you for the notification. I'll keep an eye on it. Other than being mentioned in passing I don't see anything that calls out for my participation just yet, but if I'm asked anything or feel the need to clarify my edits I will, of course, jump in. Thanks again. --Captain Infinity (talk) 20:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Country of birth

Thanks for your suggestions on my talk page. I haven't had a lot of time for wikipedia the last days (real life interfered). I've tried to ask before this edit warring about opinions on this at the WikiProject Football discussion page, but it seems that other editors as as sick and tired of discussing this over and over again. I've obviously seriously underestimated the nationalistic issues that come up with this. Thanks for your help any way. --Jaellee (talk) 08:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

KeltieMartinFan

87.69.176.81 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. {{subst:if||| {{{message}}} ||subst=subst:}} To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Thank you for your input on ANI. I've actually found more examples and raised the issue of that user's non-constructive edits, as well as their repeated attacks on other editors here. Please take a look. 87.69.176.81 (talk) 11:38, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Rachel Corrie

Hi, you had earlier nominated Artistic Tributes to Rachel Corrie for deletion, although it resulted in a merge/redirect. An editor has made some changes to improve it, and it is now located at Public reactions to death of Rachel Corrie. I think the article has changed enough that it might survive an Afd, but MBisanz recommended that I notify you to see if you felt it was now acceptable, or if you wanted to re-nominate it for Afd. Cheers, --Aervanath (talk) 11:30, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Copied from User talk:Aervanath:As I said here, if he really intended to create a new article, why, from a March 22nd decision, the fight over merging here and here and only then we have the rename? I say either force a merge or another AFD. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe the "fight over merging" was due to a good faith inability to understand the lack of consensus for the outcome the editor desired. Once the editor started to understand that, he did make some efforts to improve the article. In my opinion, the article is different enough now that a merge cannot be forced based on the previous Afd. However, you are certainly free to nominate it for Afd again on the grounds that the new version still doesn't meet the guidelines for inclusion. Also, I have watchlisted this page, so no need to reply on my talk page. Cheers,--Aervanath (talk) 14:45, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

If I left the page as it is and create a new page, actually only that would be deceitful and cheating. I moved the page, and created a title in the main discussion page, letting other editors know what I am doing. That is how you or anyone else learned it already. If I didn't move the page with new content, and just create a new page, near noone would know it.

I let other users know what I was doing publicly in main discussion page, so I wasn't trying to hide anything from anyone in the first place. You try a bit hard on trying to make me seem bad yet at original deletion talk Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Artistic_Tributes_to_Rachel_Corrie majority of votes was in favor of creating a new Public reactions to death of Rachel Corrie page, including 2 of the dedicated page editors, along with some other editors, admins advised me the same. I may know rules more or less, but that was exactly what I was trying to do. The article still needs a lot wikifying, yet that work belongs to all main page editors too, not only me, and without collaborative work it cannot be accomplished. While the new article is still in progress, you and another editor acted so swift on getting it deleted without discussing with me, before even the article gets shaped by other editors. Kasaalan (talk) 00:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

You do a lot of accusations repeatedly, but let me clear 1 part you have only edited the article 2 times in its entire history. Also you only barely contributed to the article discussions, and I have serious doubts if you have ever read the article completely even once. Kasaalan (talk) 10:21, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

BGT

Hah, don't worry man, I know how you feel. Personally I think Susan Boyle should have a page, just because she's been signed and has been referenced in lots of news articles and TV shows (ie. South Park) but the rest should just be deleted. I can see where they're coming from with the other 2 contestant pages, but consensus is consensus so c'est la vie. The thing that gets me about DJ Talent is that he hasn't even had the publicity of the other BGT contestants. If he hadn't been on BGT then there wouldn't even be any question, but ah well.

BTW, good work on the Contaminated haemophilia blood products blood products article, it's pretty good! If you need any help just give me a shout and I'll see what I can do. Ixistant (talk) 05:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Start anew? :)

Ricky81682, The Infamous Anonymous IP 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.

I would like to take up this opportunity to sincerely apologize for not taking up your advice as for "letting go." I really should know better. It's just that I've never been as insulted on the web as I was by KeltieMartinFan's initial aggressive approach. I know I went too far with that and my block is probably justified. I can never thank you enough for siding with me (for the most part) throughout this poorly constructed comedy. Please try and understand why I lost it, especially after Captain Infinity (talk · contribs) called me a "drama queen," told me all I do here is stir controversy and that I should "get lost" – all that after I've politely asked him to "at least try and wp:assume good faith." I'm not going to edit anything until my block has expired. I've changed the IP to restore my own comment on the talk page of the IP that got lastly blocked and to leave you this message. I sincerely hope for a positive reply. 87.69.177.26 (talk) 22:54, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

You'll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. That's all I will say. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for the IP to explain why he feels insulted by what Keltie said, given that he thinks being compared to excrement is somehow not insulting. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I never said it wasn't, I inserted it because it was referenced in a TV show watched by a vast audience. 87.69.177.26 (talk) 23:59, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Listen Ricky, I know I promised to stop editing but this is getting out of hand. Take a look at this please. Both Bugs and George caused two unrelated accounts to be indefinitely blocked based on their allegations. If that isn't bad enough, they (together with Chillum (talk · contribs)) call me "irrational," "crazy" and "evil," not to mention raising false "evidence" to justify the block of the other users, and when I prove them wrong by simply answering Bugs' question they shut me up. Do you think it's OK to post false accusations in my absence and hide my answers? Man, I feel like I'm in the dark ages here... help? 87.69.176.215 (talk) 07:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

What the hell, I'll comment here. I'm not an idiot. You can't admit you're screwing around here and then come here complaining about how things are getting out of hand. If you care so much about these innocent editors, stop playing games. Frankly, I don't care anymore for their insults to you, and will just say grow a spine. I guess you'll continue attacks about how now I don't care for you or I'm now treating you meanly so go on. The drama is tiresome and immature to the point of ridiculousness. I'm not humoring you anymore. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

No I won't. It's a pity you're ignoring my main point: do you think it's OK to post false accusations in my absence and hide my answers? Or, as CadenS has put it, to "kick me when I'm down?" If no one keeps posting lies about me I'll keep my mouth shut. 87.69.176.215 (talk) 09:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

You had a mechanism by which you could respond. Instead of listening to people, you got yourself blocked. You had a mechanism to remove the block (namely, stopping the drama and listening to people). Instead you created the mess here and then get angry that people are commenting on that. How about you stop this ridiculous feedback loop and try something different, like acting with an ounce of maturity? There are ways to comment to people without being accusatory. If you can't handle that, you aren't going to last long here. Note: you aren't the first to act in this ridiculous manner and you surely won't be the last, so don't be shocked when people just ignore you and move on (i.e. revert, block, ignore). If you want to escalate, there are mechanisms in place. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:45, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I obviously had no clue how to act and am still quite unfamiliar with admin board procedures. This is why I am sincerely asking for your help. I've explained it to you and extensively apologized. Meanwhile, two innocent accounts have been blocked indefinitely because of false accusations, and more fake "evidence" is brought up in my absence. Where's the justice here? 87.69.176.215 (talk) 09:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

First, don't do this. Both the screaming edit summary and throwing out Captain Infinity's name when discussing your conduct aren't helping. Nobody has actually done anything beyond blocking your first IP address. Everyone's just trying to figure things out and you sure aren't helping making that simple. Now, you could always try ignoring every little comment that other people say about you and follow Bwilkins's advice but that's just me. Of course, I really don't care about what random anonymous individuals on the internet think about me, so that's my issue. If you want to keep up the victim game, that's fine with me, but it's not going to help get a lot of sympathy. One suggestion: shut things off, get a good's night sleep and think clearly in the morning. Also, my email is my name here at gmail.com if you want. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much, will do :) As for my edit summary, I hate to see Smedpull and Chingadiculous take the fall for my misbehavior. Any chance of reconsidering that issue? 87.69.176.215 (talk) 10:27, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Since it's just a couple of users musing for the most part, is there a point to doing so? It's not like we're blocking or even warning them. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Check again: they've both been indefinitely blocked because of the sockpuppetry mistrial. 87.69.176.215 (talk) 10:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

No, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Smedpull/Archive is why. That's perfectly fair. You want to throw yourself into that mess, go right ahead, but the clerk was only able to confirm those individuals. I would really, really suggest you not call it a mistrial. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:39, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Smedpull has publicly announced to have discontinued that account and moving on to editing with the Chingadiculous ID. That's perfectly fine. They got blocked because of me, period. I don't want others to suffer for my misconduct. 87.69.176.215 (talk) 10:46, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Your choice. I honestly don't care. I generally don't argue for third-parties, because frankly, most people just do not care. He can argue for himself, and unless you really have nothing better to do than more theatrics, drop it. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:51, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

They can't argue for themselves because they've been indefinitely blocked with no possibility of parole (creating an account, that is). I care because it's my fault and I'm the one that should be punished, not them. 87.69.176.215 (talk) 10:53, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

On you now. I'm not bothering anymore. I've given you advice and you can continue to ignore it, using whatever justifications you want. You're not my responsibility. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

KeltieMartinFan

I think this Keltie dude is an obsessed fan of Katie Couric's and his odd behavior in his edits reveals this. It does not help things around here now that Keltie has a new buddy (bully) called Baseball Bugs who's protecting him and of course looking to cause his usual trouble. Regardless, keep a close eye on Keltie since he's well known to attack IPs and new editors. Caden ^{is cool} 23:30, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

To my observation, it is you that does the bullying. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, don't think so. You're the bully man. Caden ^{is cool} 23:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Next comment, I'm archiving this section on my talk page and reporting both of you to ANI. Drop the comments and go do something else with the two million other articles out there. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:51, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Followup...

No, you're not wrong. You're not doing anything wrong. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:26, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

YO... MELKY!!!

Hah! Apparently, I copied the standard boilterplate, etc. from a photo with an odd name, probably one which still had it's digital camer name of "000_045.jpg" or something, and didn't notice that come along with me. That's hilarious. I didn't even know it was there the whole time. That would explain why it came up on my page. Well, thank you. Now this whole thing is sorted out.

At first I thought it was because with the new starter at center this year has caused it to change to "YO... BRETT!!!" --The Silent Wind of Doom (talk) 18:53, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Arbitrary breaks in AFDs + ANI

Just an FYI, adding subheadings in AFDs tend to screw up how the article looks at pages like the deletion sorting and the AFD logs. I've removed it from this page. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:53, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe. I don't know. But it also helps to edit this and to improve the easiness of the discussion.

I don't have time to look for but I am sure I have seen this several times.

Sad that you warn me of this but didn't warn me you accused me of some sort of canevass 4 days ago.

Ceedjee (talk) 11:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I abandon.

There is a discussion on this page. But the way things evolved don't fit your mind.

So, you decided to make the discussion stop. You accused people of canevassing. You complained on wp:an/I presenting things as if you were a good faith guy, ready to sacrifice yourself.

Is this another "tact" as you wrote recently in a summary diff... :-)

Congratulations. You won. No time to lose.

Note one very important thing that you don't understand. An AfD is not a vote. So, how would it be canevassed ? Unless closing sysop is just as you and doesn't read the argumentation.

Ceedjee (talk) 18:01, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Judicial corporal punishment

Hello, You made 2 major edits (and one less significant edit) without discussing them first. I have reverted them and explained why on the talk page. If you still think those parts should be deleted, could we please discuss it on the talk page rather than making big unilateral cuts. Thanks, Alarics (talk) 07:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, I can be bold without prior discussion on the talk page. However, since you did revert my edits, I have responded at Talk:Judicial corporal punishment. We don't require discussion prior to every edit because otherwise the entire project gets mired down. Normally I would discuss it on the talk page, but, to be honest, I wasn't sure you would still be here. A lot of articles are written by an editor in one fell swoop who never returns again. It's somewhat refreshing to have someone else interested. Please, let's continue at the talk page. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

You say you weren't sure I would still be there, but the article had only been created 3 weeks previously and the article's history page shows that I had done further work on it on several occasions since then. In those circumstances, unilaterally cutting half the article seems to me to be taking "being bold" a bit far. Anyway, I have now answered all three of your points on the talk page, I trust to your satisfaction. Alarics (talk) 08:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Triple Goddess

You're probably away, but next time you are online could you look at this? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 12:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Ricky- I've posted a (rather lengthy) reply on the Triple Goddess discussion page for you to peruse whenever you have time. tcob44 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.19.97.110 (talk) 23:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Article Qamishli

Assyrian (Assyria) just relegins (Christian) it’s not nation

We know as a Arab people there are no nation called Assyrian it’s false name, we know there are few hundred Christians living in Qamishli ,and they came from Greece and Turkey as asylums and Syrian government give hem full right in Syria ,and most of them they went to Europe and America, Canada .we never hearted about Assyrian in Qamishli ,maybe a few people left in Qamishli not more than 200 people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.109.84.9 (talk) 12:48, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

You learn something new every day

Re this: I had no idea blocked users could upload files. That seems . . . weird. Rivertorch (talk) 07:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not even messing with anything anymore -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lordvader2009 (talk • contribs)

Clint Catalyst article

Hello, I wanted to thank you for your help with cleaning up peacock language on the Clint Catalyst article. It's nice to see a helpful, unbiased editor on there - I've been trying to improve the page, but it's a hard job when there's a tendentious editor continually shredding it to bits. Anyway, I digress - I was wondering if perhaps you could please take note of the edits I've made to the page since yours. I'm still new to Wikipedia and have a lot to learn, but in these edits I have followed WP:ASF, as well as WP:NPOV (particularly the part about weasel words - in this instance, the general public wouldn't understand what is meant by "a property", so I added the simple fact as stated by the cited article - the edit I reverted was clearly "made to look...more dubious than a neutral view would present," as per WP:NPOV.) Thank you also for opening the RFC...I appreciate your efforts. Granny Bebeb (talk) 04:28, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I have stated on the talk page on this Clint Catalyst article my objections to that person making changes to the page. I am no expert on Wiki but I've been watching the situation for a while and it seems pretty ridiculous that this person hasn't been banned from editing the page. And the way this whole thing works is enabling him. It helps no one to have someone defacing pages, I need some of the information I am getting and I love it to be reliable - but I will accept ISBN numbers as references, I can use that to buy the book and make sure his story is in the book in question. I salute folks like you, who are trying to keep things straight - but this guy's been deleting references and then weeks later deleting the same thing for having no reference. Nobody is doing anything about it. Thomas Jefferson Crowley (talk) 01:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Peter Deyell article (AFD)

Personally, I favor deleting the article, since it seems an exercise in fantasy and/or self-aggrandizement. I wouldn't want that to happen with no input from anyone else, but as I understand AFD, that wouldn't happen anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.229.174.239 (talk) 19:10, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

LOL!

I guess it's someone with a deep-rooted hatred of magnetic fields.  :) Seriously, I can only recall one vandal who had even a modicum of imagination in all the years I've edited this site. All the others have been woefully uncreative, borderline illiterate or both. Oy vey. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

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

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

For your help with the IP vandal. CardinalDan (talk) 04:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Permission to Provide Relevant Information Regarding A Dispute?

Hi There,

Apologies in advance if I'm not following the correct format. I joined Wiki mere minutes ago, and am contacting you because of a muddle of activity that's been brought to my attention.

As the activity is on/about a page where I am the subject, I neither want to join in any "edit wars" regarding content, nor is it in any way appropriate.

Instead, I have a single piece of information that I think you might find relevant--especially as an admin. As it appears that you are the moderator dealing with, well, an embarrassing amount of bickering, is there a means by which I can communicate a simple fact that might potentially be considered libelous if posted publicly?

I hope you understand the unusual situation I am in, and that my only interest is to communicate one tidbit of information that might perhaps aid in resolving a COI-dispute. Is it inappropriate that I interact with you on this matter (since you are already well-aware of the situation/history)? Or should I contact another party regardless?

Thanks for your help.

Wondering About Wiki (talk) 06:06, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you.

Recent discussions elsewhere on Wikipedia have reminded me that you were, at the time, the only one who noticed and supported my efforts to improve articles with information taken from bilateral relations articles sent to AfD, specifically here. I wanted to thank you for that. --BlueSquadronRaven 16:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

New Kadampa tradition

Please just read the thing I posted before you take sides???I think youll find that if numrous editors report these people for the same thing, there is a chance it might be happening. Remember what they say,'Just because you have paranoia it doesnt mean that everyone isnt out to get you! best wishes Yonteng (talk) 21:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Please Check Your Email.

Thanks, Wondering About Wiki (talk) 04:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

It was brought to my attention that the email address previously listed in my preferences requires one to fill out a "spam-blocker."

Apologies for not remembering that annoyance; hence, I have replaced the address with another.

Best Regards, Wondering About Wiki (talk) 21:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Sec Navy Wilbur

File source problem with File:Sec Navy Wilbur.jpg Thanks for uploading File:Sec Navy Wilbur.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 10:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I got the photo of Secretary of Navy Wilbur from the page in Wikipedia on Admiral Yamamoto. The photo is copywrite Navy Department photo.Ustye (talk) 05:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Description Yamamoto-Wilbur.jpg English: Source: http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/prs-for/japan/japrs-xz/i-yamto.htm Captain Isoroku Yamamoto, Japanese Navy, (left) with U.S. Secretary of the Navy Curtis D. Wilbur (right) Photographed at the Navy Department, Washington, DC, circa 1925-28, while Capt. Yamamoto was serving as Japanese Naval Attache to the U.S.

Source Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by User:Scooter using CommonsHelper.

Date 2007-04-23 (original upload date)

Author Original uploader was The Mystery Man at en.wikipedia

Permission (Reusing this image) PD-USGOV-MILITARY-NAVY. Ustye (talk) 05:52, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ustye"

New! Pakistani military history task force

  

I am contacting you because I see you have contributed to articles about the military history of Pakistan or its armed forces. To help improve Wikipedia's coverage of this important topic, and to provide support and coordination of individual editors, the Military history WikiProject has now set up a newPakistani military history task force.

If you would like to join up, as a founder member of this important new initiative, please add your name to the Participants' List. Thank you for your time. I hope you can help.  Roger Davies ^talk 06:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

You have failed to bring any arguments on the Edin Dzeko talk page about the place of birth. This not the way an administrator should act. Please provide clear arguments for the blocking of the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.68.219.224 (talk) 23:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Administrators noticeboard COI_User:Hullaballoo_Wolfowitz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AN#COI_User:Hullaballoo_Wolfowitz I know "COI" is the new buzz phrase but I truly think this is the case here. I'd like you to see this as a neutral third party. As you and I do not know each other, correct? thanks in advance, Xtian1313 (talk) 01:25, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

What to do

Look here's the deal. Xtian1313 will not out me but I will say this. Isn't it against wiki policy to out users? I am not a sock. I am a person. I don't really know the people's pages of whom I'm editing. I just know that some really unfair stuff has been going on here. I am not a member of Scarling. I'm not a family member. I do not know Clint Catalyst. I barely know anybody in this city. What I do is google the sections that User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz has blanked. If there's a ref link, I add it. Constructive? YES! I like the work of the artists that User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz is removing.

I'd really like to sign up and have a real account but I honestly think all people involved esp. Xtian1313 who has been very honest, have been treated unfairly.

So what now? I can just change IP addresses as I'll have a new location in a few days.

You are an admin. Tell me what I should do. 69.238.165.217 (talk) 03:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC) I'm just so tired of watching this back and forth and people getting accused.

User:Diamonddannyboy and Darren M. Jackson

Hi, Diamonddannyboy (talk · contribs) has returned and your input on his additions would be much appreciated. One of the main issues is Jackson's claimed relation to Henry Jackson, who is claimed (see a pattern here?) to have been regarded as the "King of the Gypsies". From the previous discussion, it seems he concludes they are related by following birth-certificates which seems very much like OR to me. Cheers, --aktsu ^(t / c) 06:42, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Understandable, but I figured I might as well ask anyway :) --aktsu ^(t / c) 10:26, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Theophilus Thompson

Hi. Just wanted to let you know that, regretfully, I've quick-failed Theophilus Thompson's GA nomination in accordance with the quick-fail criterion, which prohibit the presence of cleanup/stub tags. It is indeed a nice article, but please ensure it is comprehensive. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

RfC Invitation

Within the past month or so, you appear to have commented on at least one AN/I, RS/N, or BLP/N thread involving the use of the term "Saint Pancake" in the Rachel Corrie article. As of May 24th, 2009, an RfC has been open at Talk:Rachel_Corrie#Request_for_Comments_on_the_inclusion_of_Saint_Pancake for over a week. As editors who have previously commented on at least one aspect of the dispute, your further participation is welcome and encouraged. Jclemens (talk) 23:00, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Maury Markowitz

Since you commented in the Great Clay Belt deletion review, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Maury Markowitz and redirect deletions. Feel free to ignore or remove this if you're not. --NE2 13:10, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Pyraechmes

Hi! It is not my attention to defend Pyraechmes. It is clear that many of their comments are unacceptable, and various edits of theirs problematic. Nevertheless, especially after this last comment of the above user, I felt the need to contact you. I regarded the block as excessive from the first moment. It is characteristic that another adm moments after the ind block did what to me seemed the most rational measure: issued a straightforward last warning.

In any case, it is also true that Pyraechmes' immediate reaction after the block was even worse: creation of a sock; this nonsense etc. Nevertheless, I now see a different attitude from Pyraechmes: a) removing of inappropriate comments [4], b) calm response (see above) to the rejection of his request to be unblocked. This is a different approach, and an outright rejection does not seem to me the most adequate response.

My proposal is the indef block to be reduced to 1 week block, accompanied with a straightforward warning that any further misconduct would entail an indefinite block. Let me also comment that "Take some more time off, and learn why the copyright violations are also unacceptable" does not make any sense to me either. Pyraechmes is a new user, and this partly applies in their case. How is Pyraechmes going to learn being blocked and inactive?! And, when you tell them to take some time off, what do you mean exactly? Do you have a timetable in mind?

These are my thoughts and my proposals on the matter. Thank you for your patience to read them!--Yannismarou (talk) 19:02, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Oups! Sorry, I should have checked it out. I don't know why I assumed that the declining adm is the same with the blocking one! Well, the endorsing of the block by another uninvolved adm makes think twice about what I should do from now on.--Yannismarou (talk) 20:17, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Just a side note, it was actually me who explicitly advised Pyraechmes to remove those "I hate Jews" comments, which I'm pretty sure were just a poor attempt at being sarcastic, and then to request an unblock. I'm a bit in two minds about this case; on the one hand his editing was quite disruptive prior to the block; on the other hand the immediate indef for that one comment was perhaps rather on the harsh side. But of course I won't be taking admin action here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Removal of 10ds redirect

Hello Ricky81682. Thanks for your help on my deletion nomination (sorry for putting it in page deletion, rather than redirect deletion). Could you please take a look at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion#10ds and see if my comments seem reasonable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.233.106 (talk) 15:27, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Jacen Tan

I have begun working on this. There are language problems. CSB is to be considered. I believe I have made a good atart and will continue going through the article. If you might AGF withdraw the nom, I promise to AGF keep improving. If my work does not come up to par, a renom is fine. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:13, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

CITY College, Affiliated Institution of Sheffield, Thessaloniki

Hello and good day!

I am registered under name Floropoulou at Wikipedia, and in the behalf of CITY College, Affiliated University of Sheffield, Thessaloniki I was in charge for main information about CITY College at Wikipedia.

I approached the page 2 weeks ago in order to see some information and everything was OK.

But now I can see that the page is not longer there, it has been deleted, but without any information nor any explanation.

Please can you help me with this issue in order to bring back the page of CITY College, Affiliated Institution of Sheffield, Thessaloniki? Please, be kind to reply me ASAP, because this is of high importance for our university.

Many thanks in advance and sorry for disturbing but this matter is very important for our University.

Best regards, Floropoulou. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Floropoulou (talk • contribs) 10:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

in case we forgot

Hey, remember that awful discussion between me and ceha about that map stuff? See again, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rjecina/Bosnian_census#in_case_we_forgot ,a new chapter has opened up. New maps have been posted on the serbian wikipedia which are totally accurate. Now that we have accurate ones, we can move on to get rid of the bad ones, I hope. Could you give some input? (LAz17 (talk) 05:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)).

Where are you man? :( (LAz17 (talk) 22:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)).

Ramu50 Again/ANI Post

Since you are one of two blocking admins on the Ramu50 account, I bring an ANI post about Ramu50 to your attention. You can see it here. Thanks...NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:09, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

User:Swancookie matter at AN/I

In yet another Clint Catalyst/buzznet related dispute today, User:Swancookie rather gratuitously impugned your good faith and insinuated anti-"LGBT" bias. Being fed up with the series of hit=and-run SPAs (named and unnamed) who attack rather than discuss, I've raised the incident at WP:AN/I. I doubt you want any more involvement with this tarpit (who would?), but I thought you should be alerted to the situation. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 02:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

For the record- I NEVER insinuated an anti-"LGBT" bias! Hullaballoo Wolfowitz that's a complete lie. I take great offense to this accusation! I need to discuss a LGBT matter that's separate from my issue with HW. Swancookie (talk) 17:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

LGBT Question

I'd like to start a new article about a LGBT artist, and before we start no they are not from LA nor (to my knowledge) friends with Clint Catalyst. The only problem is a lot of the press I have on them is in actual magazines. How does one prove notability if a lot of the person's press (40%?) is in actual gay publications/magazines not online press. What would you suggest I do? Thanks. Swancookie (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Lordvader2009

Hi, Lordvader2009 (talk · contribs) just asked for an unblock (via text) at his talkpage. Though I'd let you know in case you don't have it watchlisted. Cheers, --aktsu ^(t / c) 18:23, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Bosnia map dispute

Please help with the bosnia map dispute. I got new maps, correct ones, and ceha has agreed that the maps are pretty much correct. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALAz17&diff=296730859&oldid=296535043 Please help to move this on. (LAz17 (talk) 00:13, 24 June 2009 (UTC)).

You've got an impersonator

Presumably one of our buzznet friends at work, probably the one who's been hounding me for the last two weeks, but who "disappeared" yesterday after accidentally editing without logging in, linking himself to one of the active IPs. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Quick_block_needed_--_Sockpuppet_impersonating_admin Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 00:03, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Heads up

• Ricky28618 (talk · contribs)

Given the text of the user page and the fact that it has reverted you on at least one occasion, I'm assuming that this is not an alternate account of yours? Also see: this.

CIreland (talk) 00:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Forget it, I see it's already been addressed; I must learn to type faster. CIreland (talk) 00:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Dissidia

Just a note, here's a very recent chain of events that is basically what's been happening since the first English trailer for the game was released. It's quite ironic that I'm seeing this debacle from so many angles, I'll do a timeline of it to show you.

7:14 PM - I upload English gameplay footage to YouTube. People quickly decide who the VA in the video is (in this case, apparently the Emperor is Quintin Flynn)

8:08 PM - A user on the Final Fantasy Wiki (of which I'm also a member) edits the Emperor's article to say his VA is Quintin Flynn.

8:21 PM - A YouTube user remarks, on that original video that I uploaded, that the VA is confirmed as Quintin Flynn, as it says so on the Final Fantasy Wiki, but it has not yet been added to Wikipedia.

So now, in just over 40 minutes the video will have been uploaded for exactly 2 hours. I'm waiting to see if (pardon the french) anyone has the balls to add Quintin Flynn to the article and cite some website or another with the video as the source. Seriously, every time I've uploaded English footage, from YouTube to Wiki to Wikipedia, often a few times over and not in that order, this is what I've seen unfurl. Fun, huh? The Clawed One (talk) 00:32, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Who was

the recently returned Admin you mentioned? I can't keep up with everything no matter how hard I try! Thanks.

Hi

Hey, my response is posted here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Topic_ban_anew

(Interestedinfairness (talk) 22:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)).

I have responded you you at two other places, the Adem Jashari talkpage, and admin notice board page.

Please respond to me as you demanded I do to you. (Interestedinfairness (talk) 23:56, 10 July 2009 (UTC)).

Please Return to Simple English Wikipedia

Hello, Ricky81682! We at Simple English Wikipedia would like to invite you to return to being the valued editor that you once were here. Simple English Wikipedia is a thriving and useful Wikimedia project that has grown to include over 55,000 articles. Whatever the reasons why you left, we'd like you to consider returning to our community. Simple English Wikipedia is a closely knit community where editors get to know each other and act as a real community. We would like to invite you to take a look at what we've become! Thank you for your former contributions to our project and please consider rejoining our family! Thank you! Pmlineditor 13:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Category:Jewish Inventors

Thanks for the pointer. I think that this entire structure is of concern to some users and they want to get then removed no matter the cost. The fact that previous closes are being reverted and ignored does not help reach consensus or allow for rational discussions. With any luck, this will quiet down over time and maybe in the future we can find consensus someplace. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:27, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

an opinion on a batch of templates?

• {{CharmedSeeAlso}}, specifically, the 15 such as:
• {{BilleJ}}

I noticed your TfD re {{LithuanianSurname}} and expect the above batch is about the same deal; they seem to only be used at Charmed (season 8) (didn't look at them all). I believe they should be subst'd and deleted. You comments would be appreciated. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

our template fiend, er, friend

The key thing to understand about this mess is that it was about creating a custom language with templates. The typing shortcuts and boilerplate text are the edge; the core are those that build tables via templates. Those will not be mechanical substs, the tables will have to be recreated with wiki-syntax. Or, and I think better, deleted to avoid the work and to purge the excessive content about hillbillies in the Thirty Years' War. This mess is, of course, impenetrable to most editors and I have a hunch that that was the plan; a way to build a walled garden that would deter others from messing with it. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:59, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Good job on Surnames

Noticed you've actually been finding real references! The few existing references are often rather poor web references.... I've been leaving them in place, as they might be better than nothing (mostly there's nothing). Thanks for a job well done!
-- watching here --William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:48, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

In case you are watching, I wouldn't leave poor references in place. I'd remove them, place cite tags, and remove them from all surnames by language categories, putting them into the main surnames cat. I see that Category:Hebrew-language surnames is legitimate and as such, should be kept and worked on. Others, not so much. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:21, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Ldsnh2

Hey, just saw your note over at User_talk:Shadowjams and I just wanted to note that I'm one of the other men mentioned on the page in question. And, yes, I too consider it an attack page, though so far I've taken not action on it. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 00:16, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ricky81682. You have new messages at Shadowjams's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shadowjams (talk) 08:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

ANI

Hello Ricky! Would you have a look on this? It looks like no admin is interested in it (yet). THX!--B@xter⁹ 15:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 1632 institutions

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is 1632 institutions. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1632 institutions. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Transformers movie character page move request

Hi, could I please request a page move proposal? I'd like to move the sections of Optimus Prime (other incarnations), Megatron (other incarnations), Bumblebee (other incarnations) and Starscream (other incarnations) on the Michael Bay film characters to their own pages, such as Optimus Prime (Transformers film series). Could you please help me with how to request the move? Thanks, I'd appreciate any help. --Eh! Steve (talk) 15:43, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

fyi

You applied a {{fact}} tag to the Stephen Henley article.

Some people think that every single sentence that makes an assertion should have numbered reference(s). Some academic journals follow this style. But I believe most people think those journals' readability is reduced, and the use of that many footnotes or references makes the material intimidating.

I think that almost no wikipedia contributors follow this example on the wikipedia. I think most wikipedia contributor follow the same convention I do, that no reference should have more than one instance per paragraph.

The quote you applied the {{fact}} tag was a direct quote from the third paragraph of this link. And that link was referenced in the first sentence of the paragraph.

Thus I removed your fact tag. Geo Swan (talk) 21:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Your templates

Thanks for the heads-up about this. Frankly - I think templates with the 'real' potential to be used by other people should be left where they are (even if they're not used much). That's why I put them in template-space, and not in my user-space. However if the consensus is to delete - then that's fine by me. If they're deleted from template-space, I won't be moving, nor replacing them in my user-space - thanks again WikiWriter (talk) 07:40, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Charcoal and barbecue

I'm not sure why you removed some (more than half) of contents from the Barbecue chicken with a {{refimprove}} tag and image that I just freshly put. I don't think I have any bad interaction with you in the past, but I guess your "partial" removal is a result that you saw the ANI complaint filed by Tanthalas39. If you think that uncited information should be taken out per the policy, just remove all uncited content, so that take it to AFD or merge or whatever, feel free to do so. Regards.--Caspian blue 04:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

A ref improve tag says unsourced material can be challenged or removed. It doesn't say it can be challenged or removed after a set period of time. I removed specifically the regional variations section only as I thought that would likely be the kind of section that lends itself to OR and edit-warring. If you want to put it back, fine with me, but yes, I saw it from ANI and no, I don't generally care to edit further than that. It really doesn't matter to me since it's clear that tag can be there for quite a while with no real effect. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:12, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation, but I respectively disagree. Well, I know you would not care about the article after the discussion, but if I put them back, sources would be accompanied. So no worries, I just wondered why you removed them just like removing charcoal from being grilled barbecue. As for the prediction, you would never know the future since the article got attention at least more than 3 people from today. :) Besides, nobody knows about their fate even tomorrow. Regards.--Caspian blue 04:18, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Daryl Mundis

Hello Ricky81682, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Daryl Mundis has been removed. It was removed by Thomas.macmillan with the following edit summary '(remove prod. Notability extends beyond Milosevic trial. Bring to AfD if you feel differently)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Thomas.macmillan before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:33, 5 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Hello, Ricky

I appreciate the help you have provided. I just wanted to let you know that I replied to your question on Talk:Clint Catalyst providing one of the secondary references that mentions him as a "WGA screenwriter". I'm not sure if it's working though since I used a ref tag on the Talk page...but here's the URL: http://instinctmagazine.com/celebrity-interviews/clint-catalyst-takes-our-pop-quiz Granny Bebeb (talk) 02:22, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Break a Leg (sitcom) ineligible for PROD

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Break a Leg (sitcom), which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! —C.Fred (talk) 03:22, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo article you gave a second opinion on last year

Ricky, I'm going through and cleaning up the mess I made of Jetsunma's article. I wasn't straight with you guys, though my spin-doctoring against Jetsunma was pretty obvious to the Wiki community I'm sure. I did not have scholarly integrity in how I wrote the article about Jetsunma, cherry-picking negative information to put together as negative a picture as possible -- even more negative than the most critical materials out there. I knew what to use because I was one of the main sources on the book, The Buddha From Brooklyn, which is major conflict of interest as well (especially since I didn't admit my involvement and presented myself as an outside party and then used that book extensively for the article). In fact, my real name is Michelle Grissom, formerly known as Ani Dechen, and am actually a student who broke with Jetsunma in 1996. I was one of the main reasons the book was so slanted against Jetsunma. I was not honest in that book either, slanting information exactly the same way I did here on Wikipedia: I used things that weren't really a problem for me because I knew they would upset non-Buddhists. Describing a confrontation where -- after 8 years of my rebelling against the monastic community and my breaking my monastic vows -- she yelled at me and swatted me once, I called it a "beating," simply because the police term for any kind physical contact is battery. I swept my own behavior that led to this under the rug. Jetsunma has been divorced several times, to men who either were or later became her students, and I used that in the article to make her look like she was sleeping her way through her students. I also used the generosity of her students as a way to paint her as being very greedy, even though she's never even asked for a salary, and blamed her for the ongoing struggle to build a monastery, even though the main reason the monastery hasn't been built is that the land bought for it doesn't perk. I've taken all the spin-doctoring out of the article and I am very, very sorry I abused Wiki for my own personal vendetta. Longchenpa (talk) 22:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#AllStarEcho_restricted

As you participated at the above discussion, this is to let you know I've proposed an alternate wording (for reasons stated there). However, it is essentially the same proposal. If you have any objections to it, please note them down. Thank you, Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

More deleted article archives needed

I am confused about where to request deleted articles. BigTimePeace was the concluding "delete" post on the afd of Grantville IV thru something. However, after you told me to contact "the admin", it was plasticspork who provided the pages to me. Right now I'm seeking the 1632_writers article, which was concluded as a "delete" by Spartaz. I've posted on his talk page. Is there a hidden method to find out who the actual admin was? o.0 Tkech (talk) 09:25, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

STOPPING DESTROYING GOOD WORK.

Rachel shall be vindicated —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.53.157.54 (talk) 02:49, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Unblock request

Hi Ricky, how are you? I recently received an unblock request, and at first approached Xeno (here) because I was familiar with him having worked with him before. Basically, I had once offered to assist relatively new user: User:ObserverNY (about 2k in edits) in getting acclimated to WP. She was eventually blocked, (indef'ed at the present time), then had her talk page privileges revoked. This morning I received an email from her which stated:

• If you are so inclined to request a reinstatement for me, I would be very appreciative. You can tell them I promise to "behave".

I did not want to simply unblock without discussing the matter with the admins who were involved, but I was wondering if you had any input on the situation. As I understand the block log, you were the "original" blocking admin., and User:Gamaliel simply modified the block to include their talk page in the restriction. I would be appreciative for any input you could provide. Thanks, and Cheers. — Ched :  ?  18:27, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Ched asked me for my 2 cents and here it is: this one's your call as you are the original blocking admin, and if you decide not to unblock Observer can take it to ANI or ArbCom via email. Gamaliel (talk) 19:10, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you very much Ricky, it is greatly appreciated. — Ched :  ?  23:21, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Moving files

Hi there. I noticed you moved File:Street Fighter IV character select screen.png. Please remember to remove the move request template if you do it manually. Alternatively, you might want to use User:Splarka/ajaxfilemove.js that automates both the moving and the removal of templates (great script, really^^). Regards SoWhy 08:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Disruption

Hi Ricky, I thought I'd bring this to your attention as you've shown an interest in overlording over Balkan issues on previous occasions :). The issue is Imbris (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). User:Imbris is a disruptive Croatian ultranationalist account that has managed to seriously damage a huge number of articles through relentless edit-warring and fanatical persistence. Literally ALL the account is used for is edit-warring, talkpage disputes, and nationalist POV-pushing. I thought I'd draw-up a summary of all the disputes he's been involved with but there's just too many. Just a cursory "Imbris" search through WP:AN/I archives [5] reveals all the complaints and reports by many users from Imbris' "battlegrounds" [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14]. The sheer damage he's managed to inflict is staggering.

Recently, his hostility has reached a "climax". He's completely demolished the Hey, Slavs through six months of continuous edit-warring and disputes. He's simply refuse to accept university publications as sources o the NDH article, and he's begun WP:STALKing me to five other articles. I left him alone and moved on, frankly exhausted and sickened by his behavior - only to be followed again on the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia and Triune Kingdom of Croatia, Slavonia, and Dalmatia once more. Now I think I ought to do my best to prevent anymore damage.

I'd better stop right there. One could write an article about the huge extent of disruption this user has been the cause of... (just look at this talkpage) I guess I'm interested if you'd be willing to put a stop to this. I honestly think User:Imbris has managed to evade sanctions long enough. Regards --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 20:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Well ok, could've simply told me you're not interested in the whole matter... --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 22:11, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I understand completely, I wouldn't bother with him myself if he wasn't following me around. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 08:30, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Francis Reynolds-Moreton, 3rd Baron Ducie

Hello Ricky81682, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Francis Reynolds-Moreton, 3rd Baron Ducie has been removed. It was removed by Youngamerican with the following edit summary '(deprod, add source that he was an MP (and passes WP:POLITICIAN, add cats)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Youngamerican before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:46, 25 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Peregrine

Hi Ricky: If you're going to insist on reinserting all the "cultural references" that were cut during the FA process, please at least put them into paragraph format. A list of trivia (and let's be honest, that's what this is) is going to get the article de-listed. Thanks, MeegsC | Talk 20:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Advice re: civility & User:ObserverNY

Hi! Could you please review this discussion between ObserverNY and other editors. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:18, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, should have given you the specific diff. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ricky81682. I see Truthkeeper beat me to it to request you review ObserverNY's lack of civility and general lack of good faith. --Candy (talk) 16:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: User talk:138.88.226.42

It's definitely User:Velebit. Notice he repeats the term "editorial rule" as he did in User talk:Historian35 recently. And notice the frequent use of hyphens (" - ") in his messages (see these unblock requests for example: [15][16][17][18][19][20]). Also notice his repetitive use of questions ("???") or exclamation marks ("!!!"): [21][22] He's also used 138.88.15.10 (talk · contribs), 138.88.50.144 (talk · contribs), 138.88.103.233 (talk · contribs), 138.88.110.250 (talk · contribs), 138.88.212.182 (talk · contribs), 138.88.225.178 (talk · contribs), 138.88.226.42 (talk · contribs), 138.88.237.79 (talk · contribs), and 138.88.248.86 (talk · contribs). He's been socking for years with over a dozen unblock requests under false pretenses. He's just throwing an "innocent user" facade and hoping someone will fall for it. Unfortunately, it may have been you in this case :P Spellcast (talk) 08:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

ObserverNY vandalizing and sockpuppeting?

Hey. There's another longwinded discussion on IB Diploma Programme going on, and Observer is unhappy with how the prose is being presented. An anon IP added this bit of vandalism. Looking at the anon IP's edit history, they also made this edit - and signed it as ObserverNY. And then there's this comment Observer left on the talk page, where she writes "My "silly game" was to point out to you how completely biased your insistence on keeping this WP:Listcruft in prose form is". That seems like some kind of sockpuppetry to me, but I'm wondering how to handle this. Should I take this to WP:SPI or ANI or somewhere? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Follow-up: Observer admitted that she had forgotten to log in, and while it's great to have a sense of humor and whatever, I'm not sure that adding a section that says "For example, a perfect 45 at the University of Tehran will not only earn a student admission, but a camel and three wives. In Afghanistan, IB students are housed in luxury at the newly excavated cave dorms. ... actively seek to recruit IB students with ambitions of becoming explosive experts and chemical engineers" is funny. Or acceptable. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I am pretty sure ONY did not forget to log in but rather intentionally edited as an IP address to vandalize the article and then pretended that some "little vandal" did it [23], only admitting to being the author of the vandalizing edit after being caught.Tvor65 (talk) 16:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I also find the whole issue pretty disgusting. ObserverNY hasn't learned anything from recent bans and in addition is now becoming even more obnoxious and disruptive on the IBDP pages. Whenever the editor is active on the talk pages they become rather like a chat room and there is no time for reflection or discussion. It's a barrage of aggressive commentary including goading, offensiveness and downright intent to disrupt us from trying to work in a collaborative manner. From my perspective, ObserverNY thinks the whole thing is a joke and a personal playground for themselves. --Candy (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

If ObserverNY is indefinitely banned, how is he/she able to still make edits to the Glenn Beck article as of this moment? SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 00:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

You know what? I think I may have jumped the gun, here - I took note of dates and times of ObserverNY's last edits - while I looked at the times, I think I was actually noting the times of someone else's edits. My apologies if I'm wrong here - but you might want to check it out anyway. Sorry for any confusion. SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 01:01, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Just thought you'd need to know

[[24]] Your mentioned. Abce2|This isnot a test 19:09, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

re:

Hi Ricky, thank you for asking. I responded on my talk - basically it says that I appreciate you letting me provide a second chance to someone. If there's still a problem, please ... feel free to do whatever needs to be done to protect our project. I trust your judgment, and never even said your original block was wrong - I was just asking for a second chance for someone. I appreciate the fact that you let me do that ... thank you. You're more familiar with the situation than I am I think, so I trust your judgment. — Ched :  ?  21:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

User:77.83.164.111

Hi! Please have a look at the history of Economy of Greece. Could you help? Thank you!--93.45.123.133 (talk) 04:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah! That was what I was thinking, anyway

(But I've a feeling you feel differently, right?) ↜Just M E here , now 06:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

OK. Thanks! ;^) ↜Just M E here , now 06:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Email

Hi there. I just wrote you an email. Amsaim (talk) 20:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Update

In light of this warning of 2 October 2009, which I personally percived as serious, I thought I'd give you an update on the effect your post has had. User:Imbris is currently engaged in (ultra)nationalist POV-pushing and edit-warring on as few as five articles: Hey, Slavs again (five reversions so far [25] [26] [27] [28] [29]), Socialist Republic of Croatia (yes, the same edit you warned him about, [30] [31] [32]), Foreign relations of Serbia (history), Flags of Croatia (history), and Maltese (dog), where he's engaged in another talkpage argument (take a gander at this for example, one day after the warning about his talkpage "comments" had been issued).

In addition, he's begun attempting to gather support on the Croatian Wikipedia among his nationalist buddies to get me blocked. (hr:Wikipedija:Kafić#en:Talk:Maltese_.28dog.29 "If this I.R.Bab [i.e. DIREKTOR] could be shown to have a sockpuppet, that would be a good thing"). That post also reveals he's been disclosing my real-world identity (initials), again probably to his buddies (WP:HARASS), which was brought to my attention by User:Ivan Štambuk. His inflammatory accusations of sockpuppetry also included User:Crotchety Old Man [33] [34] who he is trying to get blocked. That's it for now... --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 22:29, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Deeply thanks for understanding and reinserting of interwiki. Wertuose (talk) 06:31, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Come agian?

You want to retract that? I never reverted anyone. I tagged a section. Also check the talk page history. --Crossmr (talk) 03:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Circumventing a Ban?

I'm not sure where the right place to voice this concern is, but I have reason to believe that User:Spotfixer who was banned for disruptive edits with his sock puppet User:TruthIIPower, is editing once again under an IP address 69.121.221.174. I came to you, because I know you were somewhat involved with banning the user before. My reason for suspecting this is that the IP has been making edits nearly identical to the those TruthIIPower was making (for example insistently changing all instances of the word 'mother' to 'pregnant woman' in abortion articles). Much earlier he also made edits on Spotfixer's user page. Thanks for helping me out. --Twinkie eater91 (talk) 14:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the ITN FYI

Thanks for notifying me that a user Yousaf465 made a complaint about my "disruptive edits". It was a mis-pasted URL, a mistake that I corrected promptly. I don't know why, but user Yousaf465 seems to want my edits to be "monitored" on an ongoing basis. I made a note for him on his talk page. bostonbrahmin 17:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bostonbrahmin20 (talk • contribs)

WP:ANI

Deletionists never win.