User talk:Spellcast/Archive 5

User talk:Spellcast/Archive 5/t

User talk:138.88.226.42

Isn't two weeks a bit much? You may have collateral damage. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. Spellcast (talk) 08:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

196.21.64.112

I have unblocked 196.21.64.112 as an Nmap scan shows no open ports at this time. It is a school, however, Vaal University of Technology. and the message I am working with on unblock-en-l says they are "using a proxy server", but that is not necessarily an open proxy, just a funneling of all traffic through one server. Fred Talk 14:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

It should be fine now. Spellcast (talk) 14:56, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

220.181.53.237

..seems to be the same POV-pusher you recently blocked as a proxy. Since I don't know how to detect a proxy, you might want to review my block. I've also semi'd the article for a week to deter further activity. Rodhullandemu 15:19, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I spotted it on WP:OPD. If googling the IP returns results of spam or proxy info, then it's almost certainly one. Spellcast (talk) 15:22, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Done that, it looks like one, so I'll up my block. Thanks for the tip. Rodhullandemu 15:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Revert

I reverted your edit in Hong Kong, as inaccurate. The 1842 colonialization included not only Hong Kong Island but also the Kowloon Peninsula. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I've restored my edit. While other areas were colonised, only Hong Kong Island was formally ceded that year. Spellcast (talk) 08:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

RFA spam

Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3
Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing

—Kww(talk) 19:00, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

174.132.56.156

Hi Spellcast. FYI. I've unblocked 174.132.56.156 (talk · contribs · block log), which is not currently an open proxy by most standards. See also [1] and Lokeshjoshi. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:20, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

File:1934 Protocols Patriotic Pub.jpg

Hi. The above item was deleted by you when I was away more than seven (7) days. Can you help me get it back? Of course, I'll provide the Fait use rational. Thanks. --Ludvikus (talk) 23:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

212.117.165.197 or steinsel.perfect-privacy.com

Hi Spellcast. It looks like you blocked the above host for being an open proxy when in fact it is not. It is a closed VPN host. I - along with many others - rely on this service as I often only have internet access via some untrustworthy open wifi. I would be glad if you could reconsider the block or turn it into a softblock so I can at least participate when I'm logged in. Thanks in advance! Sbstn (talk) 15:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

161.200.255.162

I cannot confirm any open ports on 161.200.255.162 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) at this time using NMAP. I have unblocked it, but will monitor it. Fred Talk 22:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: Countries by area

First of all, if Denmark's outlying territories shouldn't be included in Denmark's total area, why should other countries' outlying territories do so? Examples are outlying territories of Brazil, all its islands are included, so why shouldn't the islands of Denmark be? Some of Australia's islands are included. All of Mexico's islands are included. Some separate entries of France are included, for example French Guiana and Guadeloupe. Can't see why some outlying territories are included, while others aren't.

Second of all, right now, Greenland is listed under the column "Country", and also called "a country within the Kingdom of Denmark" in the column 'notes', which is completely imbecilic!! Because of the fact that Greenland is NOT a country but a Danish island. (Also, some interesting notes I wrote about Greenland has been disabled!).

So the Greenland note shouldn't call it a country, but state following: "an island within the Kingdom of Denmark, and an autonomous province of Denmark since 1979. Greenland is, by area, the world's largest island that is not a continent, as well as the least densely populated dependency in the world." ... and now we're at it, the Faroe Islands shouldn't be called a "self-governing territory of Denmark". Notes to Faroe Island should say: "an island group within the Kingdom of Denmark, and an autonomous province of Denmark since 1948".

As long as these idiots call it a country, and only separate SOME outlying territories from "its" countries, and not doing that to ALL - I'm gonna change it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.199.177.197 (talk) 03:05, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PIO

Just to let you know, before you mark a case as closed, make sure you appropriately tag the userpages of the blocked accounts. See WP:SPI/AI on full instructions, including tagged, that any administrator should follow when handling sock puppets. Thank you for helping out, MuZemike 20:37, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Spellcast (talk) 20:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

User:212.219.203.32

Hi. Isn't it time to block this account again? -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done Spellcast (talk) 20:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Hip hop WikiProject Roll Call

Hello, fellow Hip Hop WikiProject members!

This message is being sent out to let all listed members of the project know to re-add your name to the members list, as all current names on the list have been erased in order to find out who is still active on the project. WikiGuy86 (talk) 19:16, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of First Battle of Chuenpee

Hello! Your submission of First Battle of Chuenpee at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Calmer Waters 23:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

76.76.0.0/19

I have unblocked 76.76.0.0/19 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as a scan of one of the virtual servers does not show open ports at this time. I'm assuming that one, which someone wants to use to create an account from, is typical of improved configuration by the host. Fred Talk 19:08, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Your assistance to blocked users is appreciated, but I don't believe leaving the range unblocked is the best choice. No useful conclusions can be made from scanning the range. The vast majority of traffic from this webhost comes from open proxies. Because those times when someone legitimately edits from their personal server is exceedingly rare when compared to open proxy traffic, it's best to either grant IPBE or softblock individual IPs by allowing account creation (which would override the rangeblock) with a note to login. Unless there's anything to add, I'll be reblocking that range with an expiry time. Spellcast (talk) 10:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Capture of Chusan

On December 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Capture of Chusan, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 19:35, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Aftermath.

Hello Spellcast, I was wondering if you could possibly give your input on a debate being held on the Talk:Aftermath Entertainment page? --HELLØ ŦHERE 01:09, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure. Spellcast (talk) 15:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Howqua

Thank you for adding photos to Howqua. I had been looking for pictures for a long time and couldn't find any that would meet the Wiki Photo Lic. req. Please come in and help to improve that entry. Thank you again. TheAsianGURU (talk) 21:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. Spellcast (talk) 03:53, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

User:ANTE RAKELA

FYI but because of this further comment, I disabled the editor's ability to further post unblock requests. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

He had it coming, but I suspect this may not be the last of him. Spellcast (talk) 03:53, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, again.

Hello Spell, I was wondering if I could possibly get your help again. I'm sorry to have to bother you like this. There's an editor who continuously vandalizes the Soulja Boy Tell'em page and has been warned several times, in multiple ways, yet continues. I'm afraid I will end up breaking 3RR and possible get blocked myself. If you could help in some way, that'd be great. If not, thank you anyway. Have a great day and happy editing. --HELLØ ŦHERE 19:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm late, but I see he's been blocked. Just leave me a note if there's if there's anything else I can help with. Spellcast (talk) 04:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Spelling

It is no good to alter an established historical term in English to pinyin of Putonghua / Mandarin. It gives trouble to find references to these kinds of events. For example, we say "the Fall of Constantinople", not "the Fall of Istanbul"; "the Merchant of Venice", not "the Merchant of Venezia". Here is English Wikipedia, not a pinyin Wikipedia; not every term related to China is appropriate to convert to pinyin. Chuenpee, or Chuenpei was the name used by the British at that time, thus the convention got its proper name, "The Convention of Chuenpee". The Convention of Chuenpee is widely spread in many books and historical documents, over a hundred years. In the archive of document, it is "The Convention of Chuenpee", not "The Convention of Chuanbi". Can you see the trouble? Moreover, Chuenpee is more close to local pronunciation, namely Cantonese. If there is a geographic article for 穿鼻, both Mandarin and Cantonese can be used as name, as it is about the current geography and do not give much trouble to the reader. But it is not the case for the proper name of historical event, say "The Convention of Chuenpee" in English. — HenryLi (Talk) 17:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. I wanted to keep the spelling that was closer to the dialect the British were dealing with, which I now know is "Chuenpee". I'll move that page and the two battles of that name back to the historical spelling. Spellcast (talk) 04:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Thalagyrt

You blocked this user's underlying /16 range as a proxy a couple years ago. I think this person owns the proxy. Could you care to comment over there with regard to his unblock request for the range? –MuZemike 19:25, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Spellcast (talk) 04:22, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. That's really appreciated. –MuZemike 08:07, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for William Hutcheon Hall

On March 21, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article William Hutcheon Hall, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:09, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Alexander Robert Johnston

On March 31, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alexander Robert Johnston, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Calmer Waters 05:31, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Humphrey Fleming Senhouse

On April 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Humphrey Fleming Senhouse, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Thomas Herbert (1793–1861)

On April 12, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Herbert (1793–1861), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

NW (Talk) 04:23, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NCBRITPEER

Sorry, you seem to have totally misread Wikipedia:NCBRITPEER. The standard is so far as I have always seen for peers to include their title, unless as it says the person is far better known without (eg Margaret Thatcher), it is only for baronets that the title should not be included unless disambiguation is required. David Underdown (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I moved the page because that guideline says, "Baronets should generally have their article located at the simple name ... If they need to be disambiguated from another man of the same name, use the full style as the article name." Surely he was more commonly referred to his actual name rather than his hereditary title. Spellcast (talk) 14:43, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, you're right. I think I got barons confused with baronets. Too bad I'm no expert on hereditary titles :P Spellcast (talk) 14:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Selena Wikiproject

Hey! I see you are very active in Selena-related articles, I have proposed a Selena WikiProject and would like you to "support" this project! Here's the link Hope you join us! AJona1992 (talk) 02:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Featured list removal candidate notification

I have nominated 50 Cent discography for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Candyo32 04:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

8 Diagrams

Hey there. I noticed that you uploaded the cover art for 8 Diagrams, and was wondering if you could possibly upload the alternative cover art - to be placed at the bottom of the infobox (just like Only Built 4 Cuban Linx...'s alternate cover art section in its infobox). I'd do this, but I've had too much difficulty with my computer. Anyways, there's an image of this here on amazon - that could hopefully be used. Please get back to me if you can (or can't) upload this cover, thanks. --Blastmaster11 (talk) 05:00, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I know many album pages have alternate covers, but I don't think they meet the criteria at WP:NFCC #3 and #8. Spellcast (talk) 09:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Victoria City

[2] Hong Kong did not become a crown colony until 1942, although it was already annexed in 1941. The book you cited was obviously wrong, since Victoria City covers an area stretching from Kennedy Town to Causeway Bay. Nobody would regard Kennedy Town or Causeway Bay as part of Central. Jerimeeah (talk) 12:25, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I think you mean 1841 and 1842. That isn't the only reliable source that says the city name Victoria is now largely called Central. Spellcast (talk) 19:22, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Block

Hi. Please consider expanding your block of the open proxy at 189.26.113.195 to 189.26.0.0/16 and 189.27.0.0/16 - see http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/stalktoy/?target=189.26.0.0/15 for details. Thanks!   — Jeff G.  ツ 16:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Although those open proxies are unfortunate, I'm reluctant to block ISP ranges because, unlike webhosts, ISPs are much more prone to collateral damage. Spellcast (talk) 08:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk:History of colonial Hong Kong#Requested move

As a past participant in Talk:History of colonial Hong Kong#Confused time-line, I thought you might be interested to know that there's a new attempt to reach consensus on the matter being addressed at Talk:History of colonial Hong Kong#Requested move. Please come by and share your thoughts to help form a consensus. Pædia 14:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I've supported the move. Since that article only covers the period from the 1800s to the 1930s (despite what the infobox shows), I was planning to create a new page that covers the whole period at British Hong Kong in a few weeks. But if the proposal is successful, that's fine as well. Spellcast (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Would you mind if I posted your version to British Hong Kong? We could then further edit it and other History of Hong Kong articles. Cheers, Pædia 05:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Although incomplete, I've gone ahead and posted it. The under construction tag will probably be up for a week or so. Spellcast (talk) 06:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Re

Hi Speelcast. Sorry I can't find more at this point, but I agree the figures seem very high. Reading trough some excerpts on Google Books, it might seem that it was actually a few dozen casulties on the Western side at least. If you have anything more precise, it would be very welcome. Per Honor et Gloria ✍ 22:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

K thanks, I'll update the numbers. Spellcast (talk) 22:19, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your good edits at Neil deGrasse Tyson. Best wishes Span (talk) 19:12, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Spellcast (talk) 12:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Misinterpretation of sources

In the Svetozar Boroević article a number of the English language written references is used to 'prove' that Boroević was born in a Croatian (ethnic) family. I went through these references (online) and found that both Otberg and the IP 71.163.226.233 user are right.

See here and here

You warned Wustefuchs user here against similar attempt. Looks like he did not get your warning seriously.

I do not want enter into discussion if a user rejects any serious discussion and, therefore, do not know how to handle this issue.--96.231.71.176 (talk) 22:01, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

The Opium War

Hi, I'm the main editor of the Second Opium War on chinese wikipedia. I would say thank you for the changing of the paint's introduction that I uploaded the image.

• On the one hand, I've looked for your changes in different wikipedias. So you must know the languages?
• Are you interested in the opium wars due to a lot of articles you wrote?

Best wishes--俠刀行 (talk) 14:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it's interesting to read about this collision between the industrial age of Britain (then the foremost global power) versus the largely medieval "Middle Kingdom" that saw itself as the centre of the universe. (China led the world in scientific developments until about the 16th century, and later fell behind after the Industrial Revolution). I'm familiar with the history of the first war, but not yet the second. As for the Chinese wiki, I only passed by to add images or sourced numerical values, but I can't speak the language. Spellcast (talk) 23:56, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

List of largest empires

Hi there. We're having a content dispute at the article above - the list of empires has a large 216 entries, and currently the article sees fit to repeat this list 6 times! Clearly a waste of storage and bandwidth. A better solution (saving at least 30% and making it much easier to read and use) would be a table with a column for each attribute, sortable, as used in many other articles (see the discussion). However, a silent editor keeps reverting attempts to clean up the article, without explanation. Please see the discussion (currently nobody disagrees). Your comments would be welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.18.207 (talk) 21:18, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

It's good to see good-faith improvements, but to be honest, I don't think that article should exist. It's full of fundamental WP:OR problems, and I wouldn't be surprised if it ultimately gets deleted. If anything, it should be merged with List of empires if possible. Spellcast (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

File:GFAJ-1 (grown on arsenic).jpg

Hallo Spellcast! you deleted the local source file File:GFAJ-1 (grown on arsenic).jpg before the bot check in commons was done. How should it be properly done if you already delete the source file?! :) That's a bit unuseful. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:10, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean by bot check? I reviewed the file and everything in the local version (the file, description, upload log etc.) is preserved in Commons. Currently, the file is protected on Commons, so I can't tidy up the redundant licenses, but I will once its unprotected. Spellcast (talk) 03:20, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I've temporarily restored the file in case anyone uses this in the news section of the front page. Spellcast (talk) 04:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Spellcast, I should have been more clearly.

With bot check I meant checking that all information was transferred correctly and then removing the template on top of the page. Which you would have probably done if the file wasn't protected in commons at this time. I did not know it was protected, sorry.

All fine now. Thanks for your response and have a nice day! --Saibo (Δ) 17:19, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Signing the Treaty of Tientsin.jpg

Hey, I found the artist of the print. Notice that the orginal print is colored. You have to find and upload another one.

Happy new year! (even though I hate to celebrate that)--俠刀行 (talk) 10:32, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

• By the way, I'll upload another image about this treaty soon.--俠刀行 (talk) 10:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the source, I'll upload it to the article. Spellcast (talk) 19:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Tomascastelazo (talk · contribs)

Hi Spellcast, I'm confused as to why you would give this account an IP block exemption, when he was using a blocked proxy—67.159.50.130 (talk · contribs)—and is a sporadically used account reactivated to vote in a contentious AfD. How did you know that was his IP address, by the way? SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 19:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

See this. I thought he might've been collateral damage on a shared sever. If you suspect IPBE has been misused, feel free to remove or discuss it with the user. Spellcast (talk) 19:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

• The fact that I do not participate much in EW is due to the fact that I upload to Commons because I deal mostly with images, but that does not mean that I do not visit EW... I sure hope that a vote in a discussion is not grounds to have my IP address or account blocked. I think that my record can speak for itself, and myself. --tomascastelazo (talk) 15:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

More forgery from the same person

See my note here--166.32.193.81 (talk) 18:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)