If you leave a message here, I will respond on your talk page,unlessI perfectly know you are watching this page.
Hello, Tbhotch! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! fetchcomms04:09, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
HI, there again. Apologize since I was too busy with school the last month, but I finally got a comprehensive peer review right here. Would you like to assist me in accomplishing some of these tasks? Birdienest81 (talk) 06:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You and Tibetan Prayer think that if there is a lot of information, then two articles. Im working on expansion as I visited the area over Semana Santa. Finding lots of info. Looks like Ill be keeping them separate.Thelmadatter (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help and advice, Tbhotch. It seems that the two of us really are like police when it comes to those Oscar ceremony articles.
By the way, I'm trying to update my user main page so you (and other Wikipedians) can get to know me and my interests a little better. Do you have any tips on how I can make my User page better as an identificiation. Also is there any good tips on how I can become more helpfulas an editor on Wikipdia? I've known this website for seven years.Birdienest81 (talk) 03:29, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there! I was glad to see you added Aquí no hay quien viva to the relevant wikiprojects. :) I'm not sure about the relevance of one of them, though - wikiproject:Soap Operas. As far as I understand Aquí no hay quien viva is not a soap opera. I would appreciate your reply. :) Ben Gershon (Talk) 19:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Tbhotch! Hope you're doing well :) I just finished expanding (expanded, ce not done yet) Irresistible. Can you re-assess it for me and if possible, add alt? Thanks in advance =) Novice7 (talk) 06:55, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Confusion reigns! Trumpkin is not (yet?) indef blocked - Irvine22 is. They may be the same person but I don't think we know that yet, do we? Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It makes more sense that you have bracketed it now, but I disagree that "it" could be confused for "I Got You", especially as she goes on to talk about I Got You. It's self explanatory that she is talking about Echo itself because of what comes after. calvin999 (talk) 01:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After she references Echo, she says about Happy and I Got You, therefore she does. But whatever, it's fine as it is. BUT, why have you got rid of the S&M GA reviews??? Now I can't see what the things are that I need to do... calvin999 (talk) 01:57, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh right, okay. Also so you know, when I reverted your edit, I removed the extra "l" from the website address because the reference at the bottom of the article wasn't working, but when you reverted me, it also reverted the link being able to work, hence why you had to remove the "l" again. calvin999 (talk) 02:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the double didn't work, so when you reverted me, it went back to a double after I had made it a single, hence why you had change it back to single. calvin999 (talk) 02:10, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how else to out it in plain and simple English lol.
# I reverted your edit of "Echo" to "it". I also changed "htmll" to"html"
# Then, you reverted my edit, changing "it" to "Echo" and in turn, "html" to "htmll"
# Hence, why you then had to change "htmll" to "html" in another edit afterwards because you hadn't seen that I had corrected the link already as it didn't work. lol calvin999 (talk) 02:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
He has paid another visit to my talk page: [1]. You removed his previous contribution to my talk page, so I thought you might be interested. Thanks much -- Foetusized (talk) 16:50, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!
Thanks so much for all of the work you are doing with assessments/WikiProject Banner Shells, etc. I noticed many of your contributions to the Grammy lists. Keep up the great work--it does not go unnoticed! --Another Believer(Talk)20:37, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you
The Minor Barnstar
Thanks so much for making sure that the articles I protect get the appropriate little padlock on them. I always seem to forget - and you always seem to be the one cleaning up after me. Risker (talk) 04:59, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sheffield Wednesday F.C
The article used incorrect English. It had nothing at all to do with it being British English. A club however big is still a single object, which is why I tried to change "They" and other plural forms in the article. View other English clubs like Manchester United as an example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BoomBoomPoo (talk • contribs) 07:55, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely not. Your English has become awesome. This comes as a sincere declaration (not just for pleasing you). Let me tell you that "Run the World" is the only song on the album that has those marching beats. The rest are mostly ballads in the vein of "Halo" and i am not joking. Jivesh • Talk2Me08:13, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Damnit! I missed it. I was afraid something like that would happen. I'm currently serving as a United States Peace Corps volunteer (English teacher) in the Kyrgyz Republic. As you may be aware, internet access in this part of the world is rather spotty and unreliable (and surprisingly expensive). I try to keep up with Wiki but it's hard to do so when I don't even check my email for about a week at a time. Thank you very much for alerting me to the fact. I put a lot of effort into that article on Egyptian literature and I'm glad that it's finally had it's day in the sun.
Hi, thanks for fixing. I'll go through the rest of the pages in that set (in my userspace) to ensure the template doesn't appear at the bottom. Not something I'd ever have picked up myself. Tony(talk) 03:59, 12 June 2011 (UTC) PS, Oh, I like "This user believes any universe would be a happier, safer and saner place if there were no religion." Have you visited any of the large number of vids of Christopher Hitchens in debate and interview, on YouTube? Tony(talk)04:37, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Huh I was literally looking at the WP:ALBUM assessment criteria to see if the article on [[]] matched them, when you downgraded the article to C-class, citing a lack of supporting materials. (referencing and citation and coverage and accuracy were not checked, but the article is pretty short, so you can see that citations exist, they are to reliable sources, and the coverage extends about as far as it can on the topic.) What supporting materials do you think need to be added? A sound sample to display the world music influences? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:24, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Coverage You are correct that the article is short and will certainly stay that way, but there is a mention of critical reception from The Village Voice. Wikipedia:Notability (music) (currently) states that albums are notable "with significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject... In general, if the musician or ensemble is notable, and if the album in question has been mentioned in multiple reliable sources, then their officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia." There are several outlets that reported the release of the album and one that reviewed it, so it might be a close one on notability, but the sources exist. As far as background goes, I could easily get material on the duo's collaboration and the tour to contextualize the recording. There are several pictures on Commons that could be added to enhance the article as well. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:44, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gah, I have another review? I tend to forget them in the last minute. Don't worry, "Ironic" has basic MOS issues. As for "Halo" I will take a look, this will be good as I haven't been to most Yonka articles in recent times. (Jivesh does have a WP:OWN kinda behavior towards them.). Btw, if you could comment in the GTC, it will be good. Heaven knows whether they would really need the song articles to be included. — Legolas(talk2me)06:29, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Halo" looks strong, but this troll has returned, so no, be prepared for one very strong oppose from him because "Halo" is not on par with "Hey Jude", the crappiest article if I have ever seen. — Legolas(talk2me)06:33, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
lol. I've not read "Hey Jude", but after 4 years of its last review it may be deserves to be at FARC, fans destroy everything they touch. Anyway I have a valid and solid argument against him, which is obvious: There are huge difference between "Hey Jude" and "Halo", the most important, 41 years of difference. His last victim, Cirt, is dealing with him. By the Way, I left a comment at YCD GTC. ۞Tbhotch™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English?06:39, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You know what is his exact problem? He models a few articles as the best, and would refuse to budge from them, if a similar themed article comes, but with a little different design or content. Its orthodoxy to the core. Some comments he left for Cirt are good, some are the same bull-shit. Pray he never comes in front of me with the crappy view during "Bad Romance"'s FAC, or Imma kill a a bitch. PS I added all the alt text for the YCD GTC articles. Btw, I never get to see you around nowadays, training for future admin eh? :P — Legolas(talk2me)06:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What would you expect from a "retired editor" who comments that "[the reason for my retirement is] a group of loosely organized amateurs [who] can't produce anything close to the quality of disciplined professionals."—a pseudoprofessional "editor". His best comment was that Every taste better... had many quotes, but anyone could note the same. If he wants "professional articles" I'd recommend him to start showing us, the loosy unorganized amateurs, what is a professional article.
"Bad Romance" to FAC? When you nominate it to that queue 58etc will be blocked from editing (I hope it :p). I've been training to be an admin since some time ago, but, although there are many editors who wants me to be an admin (including me), there are many many many reasons why WP:RFA/Tbhotch will be a redlink the next two to four years, one of them is in my signature on a Zinnwaldite (#2C1608) font. ۞Tbhotch™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English?07:01, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tee hee, you do know 56etc is a sock of Piano non troppo (talk·contribs) right? If he continues the same douchebaggery, this time I will ask for SPI and get him blocked. Anyways, "Ironic" GAC will be done soon. I just hope that damn Madonna list and that GTC passes so that I can move with "Like a Prayer". Its lying in the deep for so long. Btw, Gaga's recent blue-wig look is so horny! :P — Legolas(talk2me)07:08, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately there are not "valid" reasons to block 56[random characters] from editing. It can be considered as an alternative account, and remember that CheckUser is not for fishing, so the account can be banned from FAC proccess only. You'll see that "A&N by Madonna" will pass its FLC (unless an editor has the same concerns as me, which you can easily explain), and that the "YCD GTC" will be approved as well.
You know its really time to have another recent song as FA. "4 Minutes" has been grabbing that title for too long IMO. As for A&N by Madonna, TRM had an interesting insight, why not make it a {{dynamic list}} and come to think of it, it is really that! What do you think? And damn, you took 5 months with "Ironic"? What were you missing? A brokewn right hand, lol. — Legolas(talk2me)08:24, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"4 minutes" was promoted in 2009. Since then some things has changed on the FAC process. I do not remember the last album/song promoted to FA (I guess it is Maya (M.I.A. album)). The main problem of the dynamic list system is that they won't be never complete (A&N will be complete sometime in the future); it may not be accepted by the community because it may never be stable enough (I do not think so). Why I took 5-6 months to clean-up "Ironic"? I do not know, Perhaps I was afraid of the "Linguistic usage disputes" section, what I should do, where I can get all this material. Also, I believe "Ironic" has its own legacy—although before 2010 I heard the song very few times, I liked it since the very first time I heard it in late 90's—I do not know of I'd manage to do a complete and well written article or if I were able to search thoroughly. That's why it took me some time. I broke my left hand when I was 4, and my right hand when I was 6, FYI. ۞Tbhotch™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English?00:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikimedia México
Hey.. youre in Mexico City, right? Im sure Ive mentioned Wikimedia México on your page before. We are having a meeting on Saturday 18 June if you would like to join us. Let me know by email.Thelmadatter (talk) 23:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I considered that image, but the wine and cheese had a bit more "wow factor". Hehe, if you have trouble archiving, I'm more than happy to help any time. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Palazzolo
Hi Tbhotch
You commented on Palazzolo before, so I want to bring your attention to a new BLPN section I have presented at - Neutral BLP for Palazzolo
I was advised by an editor (after a long wiki journey) to give a few pithy examples of what has been written that is wrong, and then offer an alternative BLP, which I have done.
But you gave an "only warning" notice for edit warring, which is going on right now. The IP user is removing, for no apparent reason, useful information from the "Small Soldiers" article. [5]Silvercitychristmasisland (talk) 00:17, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your first post was cruel. Right now I'm reconsidering my RFA stuff, is incredibe how people wants the truth, and when you give it to them they get offend and rate you as the worst of the worst; this is the perfect userbox. Anyway, they are the only that don't move on.
That's tough. You can probably say "Black-and-white image of cylindrical shapes, intertwined with each other, to form a trough like structure." Sorry about the first post, obviously wasn't my intention to annoy you with that asshole Charlie. — Legolas(talk2me)07:09, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you semi-protected this one once before. I'm still at edit war with IPs who keep changing the article to Downes' version of reality, as sourced to his blog, rather than to press reports. Since I'm involved, I should not be imposing semi-protection. Could you have another look? --Orange Mike | Talk16:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Human Centipede (First Sequence) is currently a featured article candidate
Hi there, thanks for all the helpful edits you have contributed to The Human Centipede article, I thought I'd let you know that the article is currently a featured article candidate!
At the moment I'm trying my best to make positive changes to the article based upon the comments and suggestions on the article review, but any help with this would really be appreciated. The featured article review is here and if you have any spare time it would be really cool if you could have a look at the comments and help make sure the article is meeting the standards that are asked of a featured article. Plus if there's anything you think you can do to help improve the article, or anything important that it's missing, please do go ahead and make the changes!
You seem to ask for help with your English in the signature, so I'll bring this up. In this edit, you seem to feel like something was wrong with the tone or wording of the change. I don't see a problem with it. What part did you think was inappropriate?—Kww(talk) 02:57, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Whee, you're quick off the mark! I change the name of a template and go to remove the SFD tag from it and get an edit conflict. You must have removed the tag only a few seconds after I did the move! Grutness...wha?03:05, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I made the edit because it was breaking news on yahoo. I do not believe it warranted a warning. It was yahoo's mistake and my mistake for not verifying the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TroyEditor (talk • contribs) 19:49, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi can you assess this article, Chiranjeevi. I had been working in improving this article for the past few months. I submitted a peer-review for this one but still now nobody has reviewed it. Commander(Ping Me)05:13, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will not nominate anyone unless I believe they have a firm commitment to improving Wikipedia. For the record, this rarely happens.
Fastily would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Fastily to accept or decline the nomination. A page will then be created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tbhotch. If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
In light of the seemingly endless disputes over their respective titles, a neutral mediator has crafted a proposal to rename the two major abortion articles (pro-life/anti-abortion movement, and pro-choice/abortion rights movement) to completely new names. The idea, which is located here, is currently open for opinions. As you have been a contributor in the past to at least one of the articles, your thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.
The hope is that, if a consensus can be reached on the article titles, the energy that has been spent debating the titles of the articles here and here can be better spent giving both articles some much needed improvement to their content. Please take some time to read the proposal and weigh in on the matter. Even if your opinion is simple indifference, that opinion would be valuable to have posted.
To avoid accusations that this posting violates WP:CANVASS, this posting is being made to every non-anon editor who has edited either page since 1 July 2010, irrespective of possible previous participation at the mediation page. HuskyHuskie (talk) 20:02, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
BiggestLittleMonster
Axl, this one very much seems like a sock of some previous user, let's keep an eye on him/her. My suspicions were when the first edit was to create his own page, copying your userpage. (Lol, it didn't even change the name from Axel). — Legolas(talk2me)05:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've done a number of edits tonight, and you come up and, without specifying which one, flag me for what you consider abusive conduct. I'd like you to return to my page and state which articles you are flagging. --Starcade (talk) 06:47, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, you've done that. Now I have a question I started on my own talk page, with additional information here:
Hmmm. How does one attribute content from actually having played the game, then? And is it not important, therefore, to state the distinct differences in player-elimination/Game Over conditions between the various versions of Final Fantasy (as well as the necessary expansions for five of the jobs in XI). You are effectively, at this point, asking me to delete references to VII, IX, X, XI, XII, and XIII, then. I would probably be also forced, under the same rules, to delete a number of statements in the Who Wants to be a Millionaire:Play It page, since they also are from direct experience with the content. --Starcade (talk) 06:55, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Given this, you might as well just toss every edit I made on every Final Fantasy page tonight. I find the stand utterly silly, as it basically would require me to attribute that you can sell items as well as buy them in FF XIII. (You've done complete reverts on every edit I made on that page, and XIV, even though it is well-known that the game is horribly incomplete and still does not charge a monthly fee until it is deemed worthy of one (at some unknown date).) At this point, you might as well reverse them all (VII, IX, X, XI, XII, XIII, and XIV)! --Starcade (talk) 07:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's obvious that, then, I do not understand how Wikipedia works at all, then. I guess I should stop editing. I probably have already drawn administrative review for the seven articles I've had reverted tonight. Christ, if I have to put considered-reliable sources on everything that I put in, then, frankly, I could probably bounce almost every article I read on the service. --Starcade (talk) 07:16, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
en-2???
Bloody hell mate, I don't know what you call an intermediate level of English, but I've come across many (far too many) native English speakers who would have difficulty matching your level of fluency. Don't put yourself down! Regards TonywaltonTalk01:45, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please report me immediately anywhere you want. I am only acting in the interest of the Wikimedia foundation. The IOC from Lausanne contacted the Wikimedia foundation and this is the opinion of the legal counsel of the Wikimedia foundation that this logo passes the threshold of originality. The message from the IOC is covered by an OTRS ticket so please refer to the OTRS database if you want to read it. This discussion is well documented on Commons where some guys tried to upload the logo and where it was deleted. Hektor (talk) 07:34, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thought so, waiting nevertheless for the obvious genre changes. Do you know what to do when a sock confesses to sokcing? Check my talk page for MindyHall. — Legolas(talk2me)04:52, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
SPI is still open and I informed them. CU found some similarities based on behavior. More concern is the first user continuing the attacks. Good that you raise an AIV. — Legolas(talk2me)04:58, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, a block is eminent. I was checking the user's previous history, its littered with name-calling, and foul-mouthing anything she doesn't like. Was even blocked before for personal attacks. Hope its of a longer duration this time. And she better not try socking, I'm the last person she wants to do that. — Legolas(talk2me)05:19, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Axl, can you revert back to the article to the original state, with the neutrality tag? I have raised a discussion on the talk page and I dont wanna break 3RR. — Legolas(talk2me)05:31, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Admin Fastily indef'd the user. I do have a hunch that we haven't seen the last of her though. Hope she doesnt end up like another CharlieJS13. — Legolas(talk2me)05:47, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I created it a week ago, and what I have now? An oppose vote, unanswered requests from copy-edits and people not interesed in the article, enough to close it. FAC process is extremely exaggerated, even RFA is easier. The only way I can have that article in the eyes of people is requesting them personally to review it, something that I'm not going to do. I prefer having GAs, FLs and FTs, before a FA, being a delegate does not give you the right to act like a bitch. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!See terms and conditions.02:12, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Don't give up
Don't give up on FAC, not yet. You're a good contributor to Wikipedia and shoould stay around. There are some issues in the FAC nomination process and some editors but you must stay. --Lecen (talk) 03:22, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Korrekshun
Since the terms and conditions require me to do so, I'm noting this fix in a comment about some nice lady whose name reminds me of a Roman emperor. Ugh, English is such a messy language. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:37, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have responded to your queries on the review page. I have put a strike through points you have addressed, ones without a strike still need to be addressed.Calvin • 99922:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Halo
I made a couple of changes in hope that the article can finaly get through FAC. I removed Bill Lamb's article, as he has no work in reliable sources in his bio, and I replaced Yahoo! (which I think is reliable) with The Sun, which has been determined as reliable. I have not noted this on the FAC page, as I thought I'd leave that to you. Good luck! —Adabow (talk · contribs) 23:57, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Tbhotch. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Shwikar Khanum Effendi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Subject might be important/significant / use WP:PROD or WP:AFD instead to allow other editors to participate in this decision. Thank you. — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk06:44, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Jul 22
Hi Tbhotch. Think that notice you just put on Roux's talk page should be July 22 not June 22. :) Feel free to blank this, just didn't think you might see it if I put it on Roux's page. Syrthiss (talk) 15:19, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me? Am I not understanding something? All of those types of banners have an importance tag that indicates a page's importance to the project. Without it, it will eventually say, "This page has not been rated on the scale of importance" (or "importance scale", you get the idea) and be categorized as unknown importance. Can you explain why you insist on its removal? CycloneGU (talk) 01:11, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looking over the countries Wikiproject, I think I'm getting a clue on this now. I don't see any importance indication on that article chart by quality like with other Wikiprojects. Is it not used AT ALL in the entire project? CycloneGU (talk) 01:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reply copied here, I ask for replies on the same talk page as conversation began. We also posted some comments at the same time.
I do not speak English so I cannot make you understand that not all the projects have "importance scale". If youu check the Template:WikiProject Countries you will see that it only consists of the next:
So it's not used at all in the entire WikiProject. I had thought that country articles would all be top importance, and other articles that are not countries themselves but still in the project would be rated otherwise, but if there are no other types of pages, I see why it's not used. CycloneGU (talk) 01:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to mention that I was correcting your comment :( Sorry Tbhotch. Hope it's okay. Also, the modification, I hope it's okay too :) I have a gut feeling that the user edits after logging out.. Novice7 (talk) 08:00, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, I do not believe somebody will be reverting you. Perhaps is him but who knows, when you mess with their "work" they start harassing you (*cough* Charlie *cough*), so for now let's prevent that that IP continue adding unsourced content. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!See terms and conditions.08:06, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I remember once him (Nickyp88) saying at Talk:Born to Make You Happy#Bubblegum pop "I'm not looking for vandalism. ALL of britney's older music is bubblegum pop." The thread is not about him, but about an IP from Michigan. Nickyp is also from Michigan... As you said, we should wait and observe lol :D Novice7 (talk) 08:14, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked Nickyp88 about the case. If he replies that he didn't edit after logging out, I'll file an SPI :) Thanks, Novice7 (talk) 10:18, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
21 (Adele album)
I'd like to know why did you protected that page. Vandalism at time of protection was none, nor even enough to justify its indefinite semi-protection, not even for a few days. I'm making a formal request to you for unprotect it and do not do it again. We do not need another Yellowmonkey. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!See terms and conditions.04:27, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Protection removed. I know preemptive protection is not allowed, but at the time, due to significant vandalism of the singer's page (changing her name to "Adelephant", image-vandalism etc), I thought it may be a smart move. I may have been wrong. Either way, don't tell me to "not do it again". You're no one's boss. Orane(talk)08:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The tools were not being used to my benefit— they were being used to the article's. The internet backlash against the singer made the news. And I've already stated that in hindsight, I may have been hasty in semi-protecting it. Either way, I'm not about to argue with you. Protection removed. Is there anything else I can do for you? Orane(talk)08:12, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please help me. At the and of the day, I had to insert a photo on the page Ronald Reagan. Please do this for me: www.wikimedia.commons.org File:Ronald Reagan, hero of Hungary. Thanks: dea Derzsi Elekes Andor (talk) 08:27, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I bid you adieu
I would like to say goodbye. You were a cool editor that helped me greatly with my articles/FLCs by leaving useful comments. Good luck with all of your editing/to do lists on here and I hope you can finally get the Halo article up to FA status. Crystal Clear x308:50, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just posted a comment to Cailil's talk page regarding an incident in which you are involved.
I'll start by noting that SPI is an area I haven't studied, so I am naive when it comes to identifying sockpuppets. However, my understanding is that we semiprotect when there are multiple editors vandalizing a page. In case there is just one, or two, blocking is preferred.
I see zero examples of vandalism edits.
I see only one editor with under 10,000 edits contributing. Which are the multiple sockpuppets?
Is it your belief that 2.220.204.70 is a sockpuppet? Again, emphasizing that I'm not good at spotting them, could you explain why you think so?
What am I missing?
Sorry if this comes across strongly, but my review of the editing at Van Tuong Nguyen convinces me that we've treated an IP very, very badly, and I hope some apologies are forthcoming. I haven't yet figured out who owes the apologies, I'm trying to gather facts.
I notice that your status bar says you are online. I will be going offline shortly, and be available only on a limited basis for the next two days. I'd like you to reverse the semi-protection for Van Tuong Nguyen, or understand why not. Can we resolve this in the next hour or so?--SPhilbrickT01:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Tbhotch. I got your message. Here's my response:
Tbhotch: Okay, now we're getting somewhere. Why 10 countries? I think the more info the better. Plus, please don't be disrespectful by putting snide remarks like "creating accounts won't solve anything." You have to be respectful and gracious about these things.
I see. Thanks for the info. But I've seen other discographies with more than 10 countries. I still think the more the better and I still don't see what's wrong with 11 or 12 or 13 (as you mentioned). Do you want me to replace one of the smaller European countries? I don't want to ruin someone else's work, like some people have been doing with my edits. In that case, what do you think is the solution? How can we have 11 countries? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Canadianforever (talk • contribs) 00:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ohhh! lol I was genuinely confused as heck when you reverted the article back to a redirect citing the AFD when you yourself voted to keep the article alive in the AFD. I completely forgot about the merger proposal. Sorry about the revert earlier. =) ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~00:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
