User talk:Wknight94/Archive 17

This user is an administrator on the English Wikipedia. (verify)

Archives
Archive 1 | October 19, 2005-January 13, 2006 Archive 2 | January 14, 2006-April 2, 2006 Archive 3 | April 3, 2006-July 22, 2006 Archive 4 | July 23, 2006-September 23, 2006 Archive 5 | September 24, 2006-November 19, 2006

Rachel St. John

Why are we salting Rachel St. John when it keeps getting recreated by the same user? Just block him/her. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Interesting, I didn't think of that. I'll do that next time. (P.S. It may be time for you to archive your talk page) —Mets501 (talk) 02:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

• (crosspost from ANI) Unless there is evidence of vandalism or other nastiness, I'm not in favor of blocking a user that posts a bit of self-promotion. I believe that if we don't "bite" this user but point xem to some indication of what is good content for an encyclopedia, we could turn this person into a good contributor instead of chasing xem off. (besides, if the user is truly bent on adding this article, this is far better stopped by protection than by a block which can be evaded through sockpuppetry). I urge you to overturn this block. (Radiant) 08:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Thank you for doing that. I agree with everything you say about people who post disruptive nonsense, but I tend to hope that someone who just wants to write about xyrself isn't malicious (as opposed to e.g. people who add pictures of genitalia to random articles). I'll keep an eye out for this Rhcp; I hope I won't be disappointed in xem. Yours, (Radiant) 14:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
    • The problem is, if she's going to sockpuppeteer over it, then blocking those isn't actually going to help because she'll just make a new sockpuppet. Wouldn't salting then be a better solution? (Radiant) 12:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Thanks. I had the page watchlisted but because of your swift and efficient reaction I hadn't noticed a change. Both pages are now locked. (Radiant) 12:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Beckett Media Company

I'm pretty sure there was a long article about the compnay, but i can't seem to figure out what happened. Does this mean that the article never existed? Thought you could help me on that one. //Tecmobowl 17:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

There was a Beckett Media article that was created in late August and deleted on October 12 because it was a copyright violation from http://www.beckett.com/mediarelations/aboutbeckett.html. Does the text at that URL look familiar? I don't see a Beckett Media Company article by that exact name though. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe the article was a straight copy, but then again, i don't remember. I just wanted to make sure i wasn't going crazy so thank you.

I While you're floating around, I'm helping someone with their edits to Baseball card. The person had created Dr. James Beckett which I have moved, per WP:NCP, to James Beckett. After looking at his version, I don't think it is ideal. What is the best way for me to help this person learn about creating biographies? I have tried to point him to WP:LIVING. He (i think it's a he) is an enthusiastic contributor and that's a good thing. // Tecmobowl 17:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Well thanks for the tips. I have tried to balance the "take it slow" with the idea that a lot of the stuff on hear is in pretty bad shape. I know Sandy Koufax is a featured article right now, and i cannot see why. Thanks for the tip. // Tecmobowl 18:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Operation Bolo

i checked up my history on my article operation bolo and saw u looked at it so i have to ask how did u like itTu-49 21:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Please don't lose hope!

People who want to see a change need to stick with it. What happens is a few of us are pushing at any given time, and then some of us give up, so there is never quite enough of us around to get it going. Please, don't give up, this is as close as we've ever gotten, and I think we're going to do it. --Serge 22:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

We're ahead 55% to 45% in the poll! --Serge 23:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

image chaes.jpg

Where does it say that my image is not free? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Levg79 (talk • contribs) .

Sockpuppetry

Though I appreciate that the log is definitely one source of information, in most cases I think it's of limited usefulness. For example, when you sent me that message, I logged off, created this new account, and logged back on. Does it show up in any of your logs? It doesn't seem to show up in mine. --ElonkaBot 03:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

(reply) Ask me off-wiki, I'll tell you.  :) --Elonka 05:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

User:195.225.189.7

You've just blocked the above user for 24 hours. This looks reasonable since this is a shared IP. of the Warwickshire County Council. However, if you look at the last entry of this user : [1], you'll see that this wasn't just ordinary vandalism, but a grave accusation against a living person that could cause serious harm to Wikipedia. That entry occurred at 15.33 (my European time zone), while you blocked the IP at 15.34. So it is quite possible that you hadn't seen this edit. I've reverted it at 15.34, so that the possibility that anyone has read this is close to zero. In my opinion a much longer block is warranted, even if it is a shared IP. Even an OFFICE action could be warranted to erase the history of this edit in Chelsea F.C.. You better take a second look. JoJan 15:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

insound article

i noticed you deemed my recently created article (titled "Insound") to be written to promote a company. i created the article because i noticed that a band's wikipedia article attempted to link to Insound's but the article did not exist. i searched wikipedia for "Insound" and found this to be the case on multiple band articles. having had experience ordering from insound and reading about it online, and being a fan of wikipedia, i felt i could make a good attempt at writing the first incarnation of its article. after receiving your message, i re-read wikipedia's criteria for notability for companies and corporations. while these criteria seem a bit odd, i did manage to find two or three places in the print media where Insound was the subject of the article. it seems strange that a company/web site can be wildly popular in internet culture, including continuous mentions on many respected and praised blogs and web-based news organizations (for example pitchforkmedia, stereogum and tiny mixtapes) and not be considered notable. this is especially strange considering wikipedia is an online encyclopedia and that the audience which reads this sort of blog is likely a sizable subset of wikipedia's audience. regardless, i would still argue that Insound is notable.

i am slightly offended that my article was marked for speedy deletion which eliminates even the chance for discussion on this topic. i wrote it with the intention of sounding unbiased, and i would have been happy to hear advice as to how i could fix it if it did not sound neutral. Rwsdower 19:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Insound

I answered there. Is your big old gun on your page for vandal whacking.--Shella * 21:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Assistance

Hi, I'm having problems with this article and was wondering if you could have a look, especially at the talk page. It appears the author (alternating between user and anon IP, claiming to have no affiliation to the company) it using devisive tactics to make sure the article stays. I see you are an admin on duty, which is why I am asking. Thanks very much, if you have the time, that is. Bubba hotep 22:25, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks like someone beat me to it. I was about to delete it per WP:CSD#G11. —Wknight94 (talk) 22:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

So I noticed! Actually, they redirected it, but hey! Vive le difference!. Thanks very much for your consideration anyway. Two (or three as it turned out) heads are better than mine I mean one. Bubba hotep 22:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and it's back again, by the way! Complete with G11 tag recreated. Bubba hotep 22:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

You, sir, are what is good about Wikipedia

File:Cadbury Starbar Ireland.jpg		You have Barnstars, so how about your first STARBAR?
		The Bubba Hotep Starbar is awarded to those whose efforts are widely acknowledged, but deserve to be acknowledged again in a unique way. Here is yours for being an great Wikipedian/admin, willing to chip in at a moment's notice. Thanks for the help. Bubba hotep 23:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't know whether you have lots of barnstars (do you?) but this is the award I give to people who have responded to a call for assistance (and sometimes guidance) in this WIKId, convoluted world of Wikipedia. Enjoy, and think nothing of it. :)

DW Article

I noticed that you unprotected the David Westerfield article. You stated that there was no discussion. That is because discussing anything with User:196.15.168.40 is futile. He believes the article is the "David Westerfield is innocent" article. He includes bias and controversial statements that contain no secondary source. He wants Westerfield to sound innocent and that we should feel sorry for him. User:196.15.168.40 edits are in bad faith and he will continue to engage in the same behavior. You will notice that he doesn't care about any other article too. There will be another revert war between us. [[User talk:Fighting for Justice|<sup>(talk)</sup></font>]] 04:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

All right I will notify you then. I don't know what is wrong with my signature. I think I did something to it by accident in my preferences. I do not know how to fix it however. [[User talk:Fighting for Justice|<sup>(talk)</sup></font>]] 04:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Roger Needham

Yep — every time the page was unprotected, an IP-hopping vandal would step in adding a line saying "Horrid old man, I hope you died in pain" or a variation on that theme, both on the page and in the edit summary. We semiprotected the page, and he started using aged sockpuppets (see Talk:Roger Needham#Sockpuppet list). I asked for a checkuser, and it seems he's on a shared IP. Every time we remove the protection, he comes back. So it seems we're stuck with full protection. As you figured, Centrx purged the page's history. The vandal is extraordinarily persistent. Not sure what else we can do. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of Gavin O'Brien

You may want to consider protecting that article against re-creation: the one you deleted was attempt number 3. --Rrburke^(talk) 06:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

195.194.74.26

I reported 195.194.74.26 (talk · contribs) at WP:AIV for continuing to vandalize after still another last warning earlier this week. Since I have found it so hard to get vandals blocked even when they meet all the criteria listed on the WP:AIV page, I went ahead and gave him another "last warning". You then declined to block this vandal with the comment "1 already warned. LIST MT". I have reverted my warning -- can you go ahead and block this person. They will be back again tomorrow, and the day after that and the day after that ad inifitium. It would be nice to get a break of at least a few days from cleaning up after them. --A. B. 16:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

By the way, check out the evolution of this article over the last 48 hours. This is what Wikipedia looks like when multiple vandals attack an article. Bots and recent change patrollers revert the most recent vandalism, but there's so much that they end up just reverting back to more vandalism. This stuff is profoundly discouraging for non-admin, rank-and-file editors, especially when it goes on unchecked.

I'm going back to cleaning up after their work. As promised above, I have removed the warning from 195.194.74.26. If you decide not to block him, can you reinstate that warning? That way at least there will be a record of another "last" warning for the next 7 days.

Thanks in advance for looking into this. --A. B. 16:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

When you step through the history of Lanlivery, you'll see it was a coordinated attack by muliple editors to convert the article into a personal attack page directed at two, non-notable real people, one named Phillips (linked to the Satan article) and one named Bonney (incorrectly linked to the Wanker article). --A. B. 16:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Jim Clark

Have you read the recent history of the Jim Clark article? There isn't going to be any "talk activity". The whole problem with Pflanzgarten is that he refuses to discuss changes - just reverts back to the version he updated in June. It has to be at least semi-protected, so that he loses one of his sockpuppet accounts each time, if nothing else! -- Ian Dalziel 17:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the rapid blocks on the Pflanzgarten socks. I do hope you manage to keep up with the level of his disruptive activity! I'm in agreement with Ian above that semi protection might be a better idea - at least it stops the ip socks that he has used many times in the past. M100 09:42, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Challenge X copyvio?

Did you check to see if Challenge X was really a copyvio before you removed it from T:DYK? I was checking and wasn't convinced. It's good that you took it off just in case but I think maybe it should go back up. What do you think? —Wknight94 (talk) 02:26, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, yes, I was in the process of doing that (I had to go get my A/C adapter, and I was distracted momentarily by some Black Friday browsing). I wasn't convinced either. -- tariqabjotu 02:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

By the way, not to have copyright paranoia, but does having copyrighted logos on the car pictured in Image:IMG 0887.jpg invalidate its public domain designation added by the photo creator? -- tariqabjotu 02:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Quadell provided a lengthy response to the copyright question (which amounts to the image being OK). -- tariqabjotu 05:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The text was a slightly reorganized cut and paste of the listed website - which has a very clear copyright statement.--150.203.36.136 03:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

In doubt, I removed it. The lack of any references at all should have prevented it to make it to DYK in the first place. Besides, I was expecting the template to be refreshed anytime when I noticed it turning into a stub link. Circeus 03:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

New account

Thanks for the help. I'm somewhat lost. I did move my talk page and user info from my old account to the new one, but I would also like to delete Reynoldsrapture for good. Is this possible. I've seen tags I believe would do this, but should it be a user deletion tage, or an article deletion tag? Veracious Rey 05:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Whatever you think is best. Basically, I want my old account deleted or disapeared as much as possible. If no one new my old account ever existed, I'd be happy. Veracious Rey 05:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Another question, now if someone sees my old name in a prior discussion, and they click on it, couldn't they in theory edit my old user page and add anything they wanted to it? Veracious Rey 05:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Can you block my old account from being edited? I see now that anyone technically could edit the page if they so desired, so a permanent block would be the only solution. This would be similar to protecting an article from vandalism, right? Veracious Rey 05:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help. Good to have handy editors around like you. Veracious Rey 04:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

FYI

Got it, thanks. (Radiant) 13:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:POINT

At Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television), we are attempting to have a polite discussion about the wording of a poll -- a poll which multiple editors have requested be re-run, since the original version was very tangled.[2] I understand that you do not agree that the poll should be re-run. However, this does not give you the right to accuse me (again) of disruption, nor to accuse me of violating WP:POINT.[3][4]. Can you please explain just exactly which clause of WP:POINT you believe is being violated? Just to be clear, it is my opinion that your repeated statements against me are falling into the realm of a personal attack. Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Elonka 15:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't say anything against you at all. I said starting this poll would be a disruption - asking zillions of people to look at a poll question which has already been addressed by dozens of people. You need to read both WP:POINT and WP:NPA. Your accusing me of a personal attack when nothing was directed at you personally is itself a personal attack. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Anaheim Hills

You are not discussing why you keep reverting it. I kindly ask you to revert it back, and discuss why you are doing this silly revert stuff like the rules state. I did explain myself, but you kept reverting it anyways without any information to back yourself up. What gives? Are you too special to explain yourself, but others need to, or what?68.111.174.76 16:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

A Personal Attack...

I think you should see this diff.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 21:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for deleting all my articles recently :D not being sarcastic. Nareklm 02:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

. Wknight94 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Lessing Lake" (WP:CSD#R1 ---- content was: '#REDIRECT Lake Kari' (and the only contributor was 'Nareklm')) 02:22, ...,(and the only contributor was '[[Special:Contributions/Nareklm|Nareklm]) 22:26, 18 November 2006 Wknight94 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Russians in Armenia" ..., you diddnt delete those if not Never mind. Nareklm 02:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Pretty much it was copyright since i dont know to many of the rules but now i do :) plus you should delete this to lol Shushi Massacre

Hahaha thanks, Im getting used to this for now i've been going smooth :-) Nareklm 03:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello again

Hey i re-made the article but i did not copy except for the quote i dont think were supposed to re-make quotes right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shushi_Massacre

Also is there anywhere on our user profiles or contributions that say how many edit's we made etc statistics?

Thank you alot.Nareklm 04:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Hopefully this article will come through smoothly. Nareklm 04:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

LOL, thats funny editits, haahahhaa i need 3 times the number i have now to make the top ten :P wikipedia is a new addiction other myspace.my iq is going down, Nareklm 05:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Only2

Moved to User talk:Quarl

Maza, North Dakota

On the United States article, under the infobox at the top of the page under Largest City (New York City, NY) could you kindly add the Smallest City, which is Maza, North Dakota, since it is the smallest city in the United States. I cant do it for I have an IP # and IP's are blocked. I would appreciate it. 68.111.174.76 07:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)