Jump to content

User talk:Bunchofgrapes: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 289: Line 289:


==GraalOnline AFD==
==GraalOnline AFD==
I have given all the references ( 5 articles from the best gaming site ) to show that this article was [[WP:WEB]] , Also the infamous Daniel.Bryant bellow said at the top of the article: " please note that this is not a vote" and you decide to delete the article just counting the votes ... Do you respect the time spend by me and others to give arguments and work on this article? The 300000 account of graalonline and the 50000 monthly active players will also appreciate to known that graalonline is not [[WP:WEB]].
I have given all the references ( 5 articles from the best gaming site ) to show that this article was [[WP:WEB]] , Also the infamous Daniel.Bryant bellow said at the top of the article: " please note that this is not a vote" and you decide to delete the article just counting the votes ... Do you respect the time spend by me and others to give arguments and work on this article? The 300000 account of graalonline and the 50000 monthly active players will also appreciate to known that graalonline is not [[WP:WEB]]. [[User:Graal unixmad|Graal unixmad]] 13:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


==GraalOnline on deletion review==
==GraalOnline on deletion review==

Revision as of 13:10, 5 August 2006

This is Bunchofgrapes' talk page. Click the little [+] tab up there to leave me a new message.


Archive one (to Nov 2005)two (Nov to Dec)three (Dec to Jan 2006)four (Jan to Mar)five (Mar to Apr)six (Apr to May)seven (May to Jun)eight (Jun to Jul)nine (Jul)

Stop malingering immediately!

What's wrong with you? I've not the time to check your edits to find out (in a pseudosmart hotel with only dial up - and pay extortionately by the second!) What have you been doing? What have you caught? - don't edit any of my pages in case it is contagious. I hate people being ill - it's all probably psychsmasnatic (or whatever the word is) just pull yourself together. Speaking of other things Dame Nellie Melba too had a penchant for a grand farewell, followed by a rapturously received return. Anyhow I can't stop here talking to you - I've just realised it is cheaper in this hell hole to watch the porn channel than use the internet) - just take a pill or something. - must go there is a fascinatingly titled film just starting - the one that finished half an hour ago was terrible and anatomically impossible. I do so love being in you beautiful country, think I may organize a wikimeet! Giano | talk 22:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giano is absolutely correct. How could you do this to us? Improve immediately, you are much missed! KillerChihuahua?!? 14:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks KC. Gee, maybe I just took a day off to get some attention :-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:36, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps BoG has been hospitalised? I've a friend, Cenzo (I have changed the name to protect the innocent) who went into hospital for a vasectomy, except they gave him a plastic knee instead, he received massive compensation payout but had to sign a confidentiality clause - which is confusing for his friends who wonder why Mario has a permanent limp because of a vasectomy - anyway to cut a long story short, his wife then had a baby (he was never brave enough to return for the vasectomy - and she is an Italian Catholic) but (....and here is the interesting thing) the baby had a funny knee too when it was born - these things cannot be explained. Anyhow as I was saying don't worry BoG I'm sure hospitals are fine in Idaho......although I did know someone once in Maine....no forget it, I'm sure you will be fine, it's only a small routine surgery they do hundreds every day just relax. If I was having that surgery though I wouldn't have announced it on wikipedia though - you Americans are so forthright about thee things Giano | talk 15:21, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, no, no hospitalization, certainly -- I would have bragged much more extensively about that. My main symptom was exhaustion, and when I announced Friday morning that I would be staying home from work, my wife -- by way of seeing if I was serious, I think -- declared that if I did, I should stay off the computer too. Which sounded all right to me at the time. Naturally, by about five that evening I was suffering the DTs and other addiction-withdrawal symptoms, but I fought through it... (Amazing story by the way Giano! I don't believe a word!) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:36, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Que? My story is completely true. You ever been in a Palermo hospital? No I thought not. If plastic knee is operation of the day - then you get a plastic knee. You want something sophisticated like a vasectomy then best go to Marseille. Anyhow why you in denial, nothing to be ashamed of - simple little snip snip (so I'm told)- Exhaustion I bet you exhausted - your wife ban you the computer? Never let a woman take control - it's like a sheep dog with blood, once tasted they never loose the craving for it, only answer is to get another one - I'm going to write a new page on marital guidance, remember secret of happy marriage is be a man take charge - women, they like that just don't like to admit it Giano | talk 20:38, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are so many individual good pieces of advice in that paragraph that I am at a loss as to which one to follow first. I suppose I will content myself with staying out of Palermo hospitals for the moment. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:18, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That was fabulous... I am still chuckling. I also, think I will not be planning a visit to Palermo, at least not for surgery. KillerChihuahua?!? 21:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You'll go for the granita; you'll stay for the plastic knees. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:32, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You have an obsession with food, perhpapd you eat too much and that why you exhausted, and your wife make you have surgery. Although if you are exhausted why do you need to have that done - I am lost here. Why not have your stomach stapled? I can get you a good price in Siracusa on a Wednesday? Giano | talk 21:39, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't do it, I hear Wednesday is sex-change-operation day. KillerChihuahua?!? 21:49, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That is a cruel thing to say to a man recovering from such a delicate condition! Giano | talk 21:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You'll be delighted to know that my first read editing in days was to improve the granita article somewhat. Obsessed with food! Pshhh! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IG Farben Building FAC

Hello, I posted the IG Farben Building on the FAC on the 17th July. It currently has a support consensus, but only from 4 people. I'd be more comfortable with a stronger consensus and was wondering if you might be prepared to comment on the article? Many thanks. --Mcginnly 11:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shenanigans

Have you been following the latest? [1][2] [3]. Is the AOL vandalism on RFA just a coincidence? This page archives similar AOL IP's that Eddie used. Remember what happened on RFA with Eddie's other accounts? Houston, we have a problem. —Viriditas | Talk 23:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Update: User:YankeeFan2006 edits sock puppet page of User:Liberian Ace Ventura [[4]], which in turn is part of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of WatchtowerJihad, also edited by 64.12.117.8 (talk · contribs) [5] [6], (Eddie's User:Third_Rail account used 64.12.117.9). Latest RFA's: on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Williamborg User:YankeeFan2006 votes support, then User:64.12.116.130 forges a sig for another user. Both users did the same thing on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Yanksox; a support vote as YankeeFan2006 [7], followed by a forged support by User:64.12.116.134. 64.12.116.130 has an interest in Unalive Vehicles (Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends), while User:64.12.116.134 is interested in the Pink Line (Chicago Transit Authority). User:EddieSegoura has also edited from User:64.12.116.135 in the past. User:Naconkantari seems to be the point person for dealing with the AOL RFA vandalism, and it's far more extensive than just these two incidents. There are a number of unanswered questions here, but one wonders why YankeeFan2006 would want to be associated with this mess. It doesn't make sense...unless... —Viriditas | Talk 01:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here we go, again: [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. I think it's time to put an end to this. All of Eddie's accounts need to be blocked. I can understand one coincidence, maybe two, but not three. It's obviously him. I'm contacting User:Naconkantari. [17]Viriditas | Talk 10:03, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not convinced the AOL edits here and there give me any more reason to believe YankeesFan is Eddie, but the history of ERcheck's RfA is pretty indicting: he votes twice (a typical Eddie move right there) and not too long after each vote, we see fraudulant voting from AOL accounts and others as well. Let's see what Naconkantari thinks. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Again, see the links above for the history of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Williamborg and Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Yanksox, in addition to the links for Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/ERcheck That's three RfA's in a row where one vote was cast by YankeesFan followed by the AOL forger. On second thought, don't see above, I'll repost it right here:
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ERcheck
  1. (cur) (last) 08:54, 25 July 2006 64.12.116.66 (Talk) (→ERcheck - s)
  2. (cur) (last) 08:47, 25 July 2006 YankeeFan2006 (Talk | contribs) (support)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Williamborg
  1. (cur) (last) 05:25, 23 July 2006 64.12.116.130 (Talk) (→Williamborg - s)
  2. (cur) (last) 05:12, 23 July 2006 YankeeFan2006 (Talk | contribs) (→Williamborg - s)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Yanksox
  1. (cur) (last) 05:28, 23 July 2006 64.12.116.134 (Talk) (s)
  2. (cur) (last) 05:14, 23 July 2006 YankeeFan2006 (Talk | contribs) (→Yanksox)
  3. (cur) (last) 05:14, 23 July 2006 YankeeFan2006 (Talk | contribs) (support)
Viriditas | Talk 02:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not up to speed about the sockpuppetry, but I have been reverting this vandalism for months. This user is also User:Tummellll and most likely User:Vitriouxc, who apparently "signed up for the polls"and edits from AOL. I've got a few more diffs here that may need to be looked at. Naconkantari 21:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I'm starting to feel caught up in a Foucalt's Pendulum style web of paranoia and belief, where EdiieSegoura with his exicornts, the Torchwood vandal, and even those parts of WoW executed by User:Sunfazer are all the same guy. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Le plan? O horror, the Diabolicals! See for yourself! —Viriditas | Talk 02:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
LOLOL! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK. With what percentage of certainly do you believe YankeesFan2006 is EddieSegoura? I still can't get beyond "pretty likely", and since blocking him won't stop this other vandalism in any case I am hesitant to take the chance that I'm wrong. (I don't think the fact that he's edited every RfA that has been vandalized recently is compelling enough evidence that he is the vandalizer -- they've both edited every recent RfA, in fact... it doesn't show causality.) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Right, but the coincidence of consecutive edits two days apart (23rd and 25th, see above) is interesting. Not only that, YankeesFan2006's previous account User:Can't sleep, Yankees will beat Red Sox, did the same thing on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zered Bassett, except in reverse, posting from 152.163.101.9 before using his account. In case you didn't catch that the first time, it's the same AOL account that he used to edit Talk:Crossover (rail). As you can imagine, I could go on like this ad infinitum. As for whether or not YankeesFan2006 is Eddie, I'm 99% sure. What I don't understand is why he is engaging in RfA vandalism, but if you give it a little thought, it becomes quite obvious. Adminship was the one thing Eddie wanted more than anything else, and he claimed to leave the project because he wasn't qualified for it. The evidence is pretty overwhelming. —Viriditas | Talk 03:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
All right, I've been known to be a little too self-doubting in this area before. I will block him as a sock. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously, that won't solve anything, so I'm not asking you to do anything. But something needs to be done about the RfA vandalism. This might be a stupid question, but why aren't all RfA's semi-protected to prevent anon edits? —Viriditas | Talk 03:27, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's done anyway. The semi-protection thing: Idealism, mostly :-) It's certainly been brought up before, and shot down as discouraging the very occasional valid edit from a new user or anon. (To be fair, there are a few die-hard anons in good standing whose comments do deserve to be heard at an RfA.) I have no real idea if the latest spate of vandalism is bad enough or widely-enough noticed to tip the scales toward more semi-protection. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
64.12.117.10, what a huge surprise! —Viriditas | Talk 04:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Case closed: The following links demonstrate that it is highly likely that the current RfA vandal is User:EddieSegoura: [18], [19], [20], [21], 69.112.54.11 (talk · contribs) and especially 205.188.117.13 (talk · contribs) [22] and 152.163.101.13 (talk · contribs) who posted the same RfA vandalism on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Grendelkhan [23]. The most interesting thing about 152.163.101.13, is this spam message [24] which is not only identical to other spam messages posted by the RfA vandal, but just so happens to be a Yankee fan site. —Viriditas | Talk 11:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock for you: User:Yankeefan2006... Sarah Ewart (Talk) 09:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Muffin MAN

The Muffin Man is my Friend

oHK, BUT WHAT DO YOU DEFINE as vandalism and non vandilism?

Um....when am I going to be able to edit things again?

I was going to edit somethings on the Dragon quest 8 page, and it says that I can't because my IP adress is the same as some guy who's banned. When am I going to be able to edit pages again?

Apologies

Sorry about the voting, I'm quite incensed this ridiculous spat is vexing good faith editors to the point of leaving. I'll apologies to Fred Dibner too.--Mcginnly | Natter 23:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

You and I both knew that would happen, which is why I didn't want to press you to do anything. I'm sorry about this. If it helps, archive the above discussion so you won't have to be reminded of this nonsense. In other news, I discovered User:FeedThePigeons today, another Eddie sock that was used to attack admin Pilotguy. I've just put both your user and talk pages on my watchlist, just in case. Another stupid question: I notice that the en wiktionary has cracked down on AOL proxies. Will Wikipedia be doing the same thing? —Viriditas | Talk 02:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help please!

Hi, I recently created the article Comparison of Windows and Mac OS X. As you can see from the original copy (actually the second was the original, the first was me hitting save page instead of show preview), that I had worked long and hard on opening the article.

A day after opening, user Alistair McMillan proposed it for deletion. I feel this is rather outrageous, especially because comparing Windows and Mac OS X is a much more widely-regarded topic then a Comparison of Windows and Linux... Either way, the article has had a rocky beginning, but with proper editations I'm sure it could be a great one.

I also have recieved much shunning from Mr. McMillan, for he seemed to sort of treat me as a less intelligent individual, being extremely snobbish toward myself (I can often make mistakes such as forgetting to sign), and it seems his judgement is based on a bias and shouldnt be well noted.

I am only 14, and do much work throughout the summer: so I cannot spend a long time on protecting/enhancing my articles; so I'd be very happy to see some help & support.

Thanks alot,

--Alegoo92 03:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Oh, okay. I was not aware of this. (I simply picked random ones from the List of Adminstrators page. --Alegoo92 04:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC) Thanks[reply]

New Discovery Re: Eternal Equinox

I have just discovered that the earliest link between Eternal Equinox and Hollow Wilerding is this edit on January 31, EE's 23rd edit overall, which occurred just three days after the EE account was created. Editor88 06:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to hear from you

That's it, really. I'm sure we'll meet often on Wikipedia. As for me, I'm very happy not to be an administrator, but I admire those who are administrators -- and survive. Andrew Dalby 17:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And have you tasted Casu marzu? I am trying to imagine it, and how it would go with Cannonau, but it seems I shall have to go to Sardinia to verify my guess. Andrew Dalby
If you ever do, I beg you to get a photo! No, I haven't had the dubious pleasure of tasting it, either. I think I like my dairy products manipulated only by those organisms too small for me to see. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:04, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hi, Bunch, thanks for your support on the EE workshop page, especially for pointing out that my restoration of a comment on EE's page was accidental. How Fred even managed to see the one diff and not the next one along in the history is a mystery. Why ruin a good story by checking, though? Or indeed by reading the workshop page--did you see that my malicious restoration now appears as a proposed "fact" under "findings of fact" on the proposed decisions page? Perhaps Fred would like to have a shot at containing the ravages of the "sensitive user" himself come autumn, because I sure won't bother, and I wouldn't advise you to, either. Btw it strikes me that if they fuck with Giano and me enough to make us leave, it'll actually be a boon for the production rate of new FAs. The greater ease with which HW's pages will slide through the system should more than make up for the absence of any more by G or me. Admittedly they'll all be written by Hollow Wilerding, but what the hell, an FA is an FA. Bishonen | talk 19:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Well. I guess there's a reason we have multiple ArbCom members, and there's a trade-off between the transparency of their deliberations and the likelihood of people getting upset if they hit upon incorrect assertions during their course. And I hope very, very much you and Giano don't leave. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFC

I had corresponded with Zscout prior to opening the RFC and we both agreed that it was the best forum for the discussion. The problem with AN/I is that it is impossible to find anything weeks or months after the discussion takes place because of the editing volume. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I figured that part out about two seconds too late :-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whether or not it is safe and sane is of course another question. Or two, perhaps. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Juniper berry

(Moved to Talk:Juniper berry) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Updated DYK query On 28 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Juniper berry, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for the contribution! -- Samir धर्म 04:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see we both got a mention (anonymous, naturally) in Did you know? today! You did juniper berry, I did Colóquios dos simples e drogas da India. Andrew Dalby 11:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was checking that very point last night. The chapter on pepper does include a fourth item, canarim, and I wondered if it was a name for capsicum, but it isn't. It's some local item -- a bark I think -- on which I need to check further. So far as I can see, and disappointingly, Garcia doesn't mention capsicum at all. Thanks for the hint, incidentally -- I have now disambiguated the pepper link. Andrew Dalby 14:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The symmetry was not coincidental :) -- Samir धर्म 19:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A higher power at work :-) Thanks, Samir! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flesh eating bug

You have to be careful or this (supposedly) rare bacteria will literally eat your body. Bug still preventing me from logging on @ this time. I've been eating jalapenos and other hot peppers, incl. "chili-petines" ( Chill ' ee Pet ' teens) and garlic for years, and never been ill. You should try this. Is there a article concerning the Flesh eating bacteria in Wikipedia ? This thing causes rapid gangrene, hence the name "Flesh eating bacteria" , the more common name "The Flesh Eating Bug". Martial Law 15:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Whew, for a moment there I thought flesh-eating bacteria were preventing you from logging on! OK, now that I've got that straight (I now understand that it is the garlic and jalapenos preventing it ;-), you can see from your own link there that we do have an article... though I dare say it is a surprisingly bad one for such a hot-button topic. As an aside, do you ever worry that your use of the satellite radio rig will single you out to the grays? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good one.
Where I'm at now, people shoot at things like that.

I have a book, called The Uninvited, written by author and Mi-5 or Mi-6 agent, Nick Pope. On one page of it, he alleges that the National Enquirer has placed a $1M bounty to get a UFO, alien matter. A previous book he had written, is called Open Skies, Closed Minds. That is about society's reaction to UFOs, aliens. The latter is about alien abductions, incl. how they're done from a male and female perspective, what the aliens may be, incl. demons, time travellers, the old "Men from Mars", the military abducting people, aliens as people think of aliens, etc.

Speaking of aliens, check the Sci-Fi Channel and see a movie called Alien Abductions. This could be a movie AND/OR a documentary, similar to The Legend of Boggy Creek. The Sci-Fi Channel has investigated these matters, incl. the Roswell UFO Incident, the Bermuda Triangle. On the UFO Casebook site, I have seen reports of the people and the military shooting at and even, in a military case, killing aliens. The Kelly Hopkinsville UFO/Alien Incident, already mentioned in Wikipedia, is also there.
Hope you feel better. Sure wish they can straighten out the Satellite I.P. bug that is not allowing me to log in. Martial Law 16:58, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Removing warning from Geogre's talk page

The talk page in question was a now-closed AfD. Referring to other editors as "feeble" is unacceptable and clearly a personal attack. It is a wholly appropriate use of his talk page to request that he desist from such personal attacks in the future. I am sure you know it is inappropriate to remove such warnings even from another user's talk page.--Nicodemus75 21:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • You placed the comment on my user page, not my talk page, and you really ought not to log out for the purpose, either. Further, I do not wish to argue with the feeble in general. I had not referred to any individual by that term. The person I actually intended was far down the page -- the one who wished to start an argument over the virtues of the wealthy. I had meant, instead, merely that I will not get into arguments in general, much less on a particular AfD, except that this issue of continually insulting and hectoring those who vote to delete any school article, regardless of content, is worth breaking my own rules for. It is extremely deleterious to have such attempts to beat up nominators, to target them, to tar them with some term of imagined insult like "deletionist," to suggest that there is a user profile, etc. It turns the discussion from the article to the person, and that is precisely what we must not do. It is the heart of the NPA "policy" that we should not be talking about character, but about articles and information. I have gone to WP:AN/I and requested any and all uninvolved parties to examine my comments and welcome their input. Geogre 21:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake, his user page appeared to be the talk page.--Nicodemus75 21:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bit of IP vandalism

Sprotected your user page. Hope it's ok. -- Samir धर्म 22:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, might as well. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Small problem needs to be fixed. —Viriditas | Talk 00:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sneaky. —Viriditas | Talk 03:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, for Pete's... nice catch. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:58, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Phaedriel RfA Sockpuppet

I doubt we'll be able to get a checkuser though; I don't think it'll be conclusive enough. Plus, Phaedriel doesn't seem to mind it ^_^ — Deckiller 22:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Thewolfstar's wise to the way of Open Proxies, so checkuser wouldn't be of much use. Probably not worth sweating about. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you guys sure? Open proxies are automatic indefinite blocks, so at least it's worth uncovering each of them that we can. Geogre 03:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't speak for Deckiller; speaking for myself, I am never sure about anything. Are they even doing Checkusers now, though? Is the labor strike over? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:54, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dude, I didn't even know there was a strike. Why wasn't I informed? I want to go on strike, too! (What are we striking for?) (No, never mind: Solidarity forever!) (Down with the scabs!) (Uh, who are the scabs this time?) Please tell me this isn't related to the RFAR nonsense (one arbcommer trying to block another). That junk shouldn't be allowed to happen until everyone who cares about Wikipedia is issued an air sickness bag. Geogre 04:32, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_checkuser#Temporary_hiatus describes the tail end of the situation, kind of... although not what instigated it: someone made an RFCU. After a day, started getting mad it wasn't being handled quickly. Complained a little more in the request. Made comments which were at least taken to be and may actually have been abusive toward the Checkusers. Got blocked for 24 hours by said checkusers, for disruption. Action contensted on AN/I. Essjay swears off Checkusering. Mackenson does the same at least temporarily after some AMA thing is opened. He now appears to be back at it with a "one-strike" policy in effect, ie, he's stopping the next time he senses abuse. Morale of the story: Checkusering is apparently no fun at all and nobody wants to do it or can stand doing it long.
RFAR - one arbcommer trying to block another? Uh... I've somehow missed that! Sounds dramatic. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I get it. Mackenson is saying that he'll go back to it but announce in a header that he'll do nothing with anything that sounds insulting. Fair enough, if you ask me. It's volunteer work, dammit.
The, um, other thing.... Forget I said anything. See, I'm right now worried that one of our comrades is being a little too agitated in dealing with a certain AC member. That AC member had wanted to sanction another AC member for "abuse of administrator's tools," of all things, too. That has gone over like a lead-filled snail, as you can imagine, so the AC member who wanted to block the other, and who has made a motion that many of us disagree with on an RFAR that we all are watching, may well be feeling a bit persecuted. That's why I don't want this associate of ours to go getting mad and making things worse.
And if you can follow all that, award yourself a Ph.D. in hermetism. Geogre 04:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, those were some pretty broad hints. I see. Have you ever heard my proposal that we disallow all articles on topics having to do with any area of land falling between Italy and India? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 05:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree with that proposal. The land ought to be between Italy and China and then Japan to Australia, Australia to Peru. Geogre 14:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes

Hi Grapes - the MoS there is only a guide, not a requirement, which is fortunate, as (whatever the Chicago people say) it is very bad grammar - a sentence should always end with a punctuation mark. If the reference is placed after the punctuation, it becomes part of the next sentence, leaving such strange statements as (from the Juniper berry's history) "6 Such species have been used not just as a seasoning ...", when of course there shouldn't be six such species being specified. Personally, I'd like to get that aspect of the MoS changed, but so many people are so strongly wedded to that weird Chicago cr@p that I fear it will be impossible to get it corrected. So it is one of those cases where I feel entitled to (and justified in) Ignoring the rules ;-). Actually, to be honest, I've never liked those <ref> inserts at all, they're horribly complicated and must be very offputting to wiki-newbies (after all, the whole point of wiki formatting was to make it easier than html - why is it getting more complicated??), I much prefer (and when doing articles on my own always use) old-style printed sci journal citation style à la (Bloggs 1990), then with the ref put in simply at the end in alphabetical order, as:

  • Bloggs, J. (1990). Article Title. Journal 1: 2-3.

Much easier to edit!! - MPF 17:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have absolutely nothing against the sci journal citation style, except that in an article as citation-filled as juniper berry is right now, too much of the rendered article text would be the citations. (By the way, when you do one of those citations at the end of the sentence, do you do that inside the period too?)
I personally think the footnote indicators look a great deal better when placed according to the MOS. There is also a small (and fixable) technical rendering issue with the syntax you are using: if you do "Text[space][footnote][period]", the html rendering will allow the footnote and period to wrap to the next line, which is really a problem. At the very least the space needs to be replaced with an &nbsp. But I'd also ask that you consider that the MOS, while not a requirement, does reflect a general degree of consensus and if two good-faithed editors disagree about which way one of these issues should go, it should serve as a tiebreaker at the least. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks; good point about the space between the word and ref, I'd not really thought of that one and will omit it in future. Wish there was a nice easy way of typing out "nbsp", but there isn't (or not that I know of!). "By the way, when you do one of those citations at the end of the sentence, do you do that inside the period too?" - yes, same as any science journal. This Amer. J. Bot. paper (pdf file) is a typical example. - MPF 23:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How to

This is going to sound amazing, but I've decided to indef block user:Lingeron as a wolfstar sockpuppet. How do I do it? I know about going to the block page. That's easy. How do I label the user and user talk pages? Geogre 20:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That does sound amazing. Do the block, replace the user page with {{subst:indefblockeduser}} and perhaps {{subst:suckpuppet|Thewolfstar}}, and leave an explanation on the talk page. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is done. See, by the way, user:Crowbait. Geogre 01:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And...? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:17, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you had labelled yourself as a sockpuppet of Bunchofgrapes, and I was pointing out the similar warning on that page. Geogre 13:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! 'Twarent me, 'twas Eddie! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:23, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lingeron

Hey there, I apologize if I upsetted you over the unblock — I just want to make sure we are absolutely certain (if we are incorrect about this, we could get desysopped, myself included, because I originally endorsed the block). Thanks for providing that though; I think it may be enough to warrent a checkuser (especially since the alleged puppet master's recent edits weren't too long ago). — Deckiller 05:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would've been a good idea, but I would've been in no place to determine such a length. Ironically, the user is still apparently blocked, despite the lift. If you want, we can discuss a general disruption block now. — Deckiller 05:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would, but my bedtime nears. If you really want to list the autoblocks (I dont!) go to [25] and search for autoblocks by Geogre. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 05:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This block has been restored by me, based on the checkuser results (confirming footwear manipulation) posted in the ANI thread. ++Lar: t/c 11:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should have gone to MSTCrow's talk page, IMO. I intend to ignore those complaints because I am convinced they're not genuine. Saying anything at all is feeding the...user's hostility. Bishonen blocked him for a day, Maggie went to "sympathize" and invite him to join her campaign against abusive administrators, and then, late, he showed up to demand that all Checkuser results be posted publically or else none are valid. Given that I doubt very much that he would want his own IP information made public, I don't think he's sincere. Given that what he wants is entirely and completely against all of our policies, it's not worth taking seriously. If he wants to demand every IP of every logged user, then he wants something other than Wikipedia, and there's no reason for us to even discuss it. Geogre 02:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. No. No. El C blocked MSTCROW for a day, which made him plus the wolfster go on an all out anti-Bishonen campaign. I thought it odd, to the point where it might be worth mentioningn on ANI if anybody cares to (I'm only here for two minutes, myself). Much later, and after many warnings, I did block MSTCrow, please see log. Note that he never campaigned against EL C, only most intemperately against MY abuse, right from the start. I take it as a welcome tribute to my annoying personality, but it did make me think we might be dealing with TWO Thewolfstar socks in dialogue. Bishonen | talk 22:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)..[reply]
It looks like -- I could still have this wrong -- you were the one spending the most effort trying to talk sense to him in the hours before El C's block. Naturally, that made you the target. Still, something is curious about this "We have a mutual friend, Vision Thing, who has asked me to look in on you and ask you to please not leave" from Maggie. Maybe we're looking at a WikipediaReview clique here, I don't know. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure MSTCrow isn't the only one with misconceptions about Checkuser, and attempting to explain what I did there in terms I was hoping a pre-schooler could understand may have some educational value for other members of our community who may find themselves reading AN/I. Although I'm not a big fan of the theory that the best way to win an argument is to have the last word, I do think there was some risk that leaving MSTCrow's words as the last in that thread could leave the impression among those just skimming the topic that a Checkuser hadn't been done. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ed Ricketts

I like the new images you've added. A section/link to Rickett's work with chitons in the Sea of Cortez would fit Ed Ricketts nicely. —Viriditas | Talk 03:56, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes22/50 Greatest

I have a feeling that somebody whose relatively short editing history includes this [26] isn't going to be in the mood tfor a reasoned dialogue. Lambertman 15:56, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But we're all so much fun to talk to! Maybe they'll come around. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Hurricane

How can this be placed in the Wiki-News section?

A new Hurricane is on its way to the U.S., Currently it is located in the drink(Old Naval expression) near Cuba, and it will either hit the E. U.S. or go into the Gulf of Mexico, or hit Florida, which will take out some of Wikipedia's servers. More can be found on the Weather Channel's website. Martial Law 04:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See Tropical Storm Chris (2006). —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beckjord

I've just went to the bigfoot Talk page, just now( See indicated timepoint on sig), and seen that Beckjord is back. Is his sentence up ? He has requested that a Admin add his website to the External links section. Martial Law 05:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The IP that I've found is 205.208.227.27 is on the talk page right now. Thought you might want to know about this matter. Martial Law 05:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Some things that you should see:
Wiki-War Declaration, ?, BEST VERSION.
In the first one, you and some Admins are attacked.
Did I follow Wiki protocol correctly ? Martial Law 07:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, thanks for pointing that out. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Ed

Thanks for dealing with the Count. —Viriditas | Talk 11:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bishonen

Is she still on vacation ? Is she OK ? I am still concerned. How do I convey this w/o being a stalker, worse ? What is going on ? Martial Law 21:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

She's just taking a wikibreak, until around the 6th, if I understand correctly. Don't worry, we all miss her. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:00, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message about undeleting. The powers of Admins are greater than I thought!--MichaelMaggs 05:57, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are indeed amazing people! Giano | talk 06:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Boxen Rebellion

I'm trying to work out some thoughts on boxes and templates here [27]. Right now, I'm looking for "what's wrong with them" and "what's right about them." I'm going to work my own delicate solutions. Geogre 15:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from that line, do you think it's antagonizing to boxers and taggers even before I get to my solutions/proposal? The proposal will be the common sense stuff that a lot of us favor: status quo has inherent advantages, changes on talk pages before the article page, etc. Geogre 16:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well sure. I don't need to tell you that the whole notion is inherently antagonizing to all procrusteans, do I? All articles must look the same. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My goal is a guideline, not a policy. The question is whether it will be possible to post it, get at least a preponderance of admin-types in favor, and then implement it. After all, the boxers and taggers have nothing on their side except "per ProjectWikiBland" and "per consensus determined at Meta:MyHead," so anything even approaching a guideline ought to give us a swatter with which to shoo away the flies. Geogre 17:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've got a Thank you card!

GraalOnline AfD

Firstly, thanks for your services and cool head when judging on this Article for Deletion. I think it would be beneficial if this article is protected for a short period of time, to prevent recreation by the people who vehermontly disagreed with the eventual result. Thank you. Killfest2Daniel.Bryant 06:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GraalOnline AFD

I have given all the references ( 5 articles from the best gaming site ) to show that this article was WP:WEB , Also the infamous Daniel.Bryant bellow said at the top of the article: " please note that this is not a vote" and you decide to delete the article just counting the votes ... Do you respect the time spend by me and others to give arguments and work on this article? The 300000 account of graalonline and the 50000 monthly active players will also appreciate to known that graalonline is not WP:WEB. Graal unixmad 13:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GraalOnline on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of GraalOnline. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review.

Graal unixmad 13:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]