User talk:Gwernol

Hello. Welcome to my Talk page. Feel free to leave a comment at the bottom of the page. Please sign your comments by putting ~~~~ at the end. Thanks, Gwernol.

Archives

• /Archive 1 April 2005 through early March 2006
• /Archive 2 March 2006
• /Archive 3 April 2006
• /Archive 4 First half of May 2006
• /Archive 5 Second half of May 2006
• /Archive 6 First half of June 2006
• /Archive 7 Second half of June 2006
• /Archive 8 First half of July 2006
• /Archive 9 Second half of July 2006
• /Archive 10 First half of August 2006
• /Archive 11 Second half of August 2006
• /Archive 12 First half of September 2006
• /Archive 13 Second half of September 2006
• /Archive 14 First half of October 2006
• /Archive 15 Second half of October 2006
• /Archive 16 First half of November 2006
• /Archive 17 Second half of November 2006
• /Archive 18 December 2006
• /Archive 19 January 2007

links added

I am very sorry for the links I added. I thought that people suffering from hair loss problems, and looking for information in wikipedia, will also like to have information about resources in hair replacement. What I don’t understand is why the link to the site named: http://haironpieces.com cannot be listed in the external links on the article “fake hair”, since that site fully relates to the essence of that article. Anyway, I am sorry if I did a mistake. The only concern that I’ve now is that I will have to be afraid of doing things in wikipedia, when in reality what I am trying to do is to help others. Sorry again. Justice all the way

Darantz11

My apologies for my earlier behavior. I guess I still feel myself a newbie here and didn't yet know how to do things here. I'll try to learn as much as I can... if you guys still let me and help me to.

Thanks again. Darantz11 22:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, I still need to learn, as I always seem to annoy somebody here for trying to do things right.

sigh Darantz11 15:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

vandel

hey, some one destroyed the norse page, I dont know how to revert it back to what you had edited last, as I'm kinda a newb. If you fix, can u maybe drop some hints as to how?

Cheers--24.83.107.101 05:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for blocking 64.20.34.88 (talk · contribs). You're right on top of things. =) →EdGl 03:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Pie man, or whatever his name is today

Thanks for the help with him. I really appreciate it... --Mhking 13:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandal

By my reading of the times, the vandalism on your userpage by User:Lollylollylollygetyour took place after they got their level 4 final warning. I am not yet qualified to block, but it si clearly now appropriate.--Anthony.bradbury 17:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Gosh we need a bot for this.

Gwernol, the IP you recently blocked is from a shared school in Michigan. User:198.110.53.252. Thanks. Real96 18:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

User Sparspost

He changed the article Poles to a version that an IP vandalize many times. I tell him, that he has to discuss about this kind of changes but he does it again. I don't want to do an edit-war, so I tell you about it. Can you tell him that he has to talk about this change before he editing again? And can you reverse his change in this article, please? I don't want that someone think that I do edit-war. Thanks in advance!--Plk 19:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

New Award

Hey Gwernol, I just made this award and thought I'd give it to you first! §†SupaSoldier†§ 23:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

File:Photo 369.jpg

I award Gwernol the Baseball.....I mean Anti-Vandal Cool Admin Trophy! YaY!

Protection

Gwernol; in the face of the torrent of vandalism to which your user page has been subjected recently, I am quite certain that no-one would feel it wrong if you were to fully protect it. The irrational and unwarranted level of attack is beyond anything in my experience by whole orders of magnitude. And while it is clear that the attacker is psychologically deranged, that does not mean that you have to tolerate it.--Anthony.bradbury 23:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

User:68.55.106.131 blocked

Hi. You recently blocked subject user for vandalism. However, he also violated 3RR (after I warned him). He had many more than 4 reversions. Now that he's blocked, should I bother with a 3RR violation report? -Amatulic 23:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

HE'S BACK! On a different IP now: User: 70.17.235.208 -Amatulic 23:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

My mistake - 'twasn't vandalism. -Amatulic 00:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for all the advice you have given me so far and your Support, it is much appreciated. I am sure that I will look to you for help in situations that i feel uncomfterable handeling, etc etc. Thanks again for the unofficial editor review which you obviousley took sime time to peruse my edits, it was very much appreciated. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 00:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Is there a template for indef block due to innapropriate usernames per Wikipedia:Username? -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 02:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Sweet. Thanks much. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 02:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, Gwernol. I was just browsing through a list of random admins when I found your name and looked at your contributions. I said to myself, "Wow, this is great!" Thanks for making Wikipedia a happy and reliable place! Cheers, --Jimbo Herndan 04:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Eedo Bee

Has stated on ANI they will continue to vandalise the talk pages of articles he considers to be inappropriately tagge. I gave him a {{test4im}}, but he blanked it and is continuing to remove tags. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffpw (talk • contribs)

He's blanked the warning given to him by another editor yet again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LuciferMorgan (talk • contribs)

Thank you for looking into this situation. I hope that I've been acceptably calm about it, and I appreciate you - someone who isn't directly involved in this disagreement- helping to mediate it. Reading your explanation, I realize that I shouldn't have been so quick to return the vandal4 tag to Eedo's talk page, and I won't do it again. -FisherQueen (Talk) 14:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I wanted to thank you, too, for your help, and apologize if I made your work harder. That was not the intention. I had limited time before I had to leave for work (on a break, now), and wanted to see it resolved before I left. Thank you for helping out! Jeffpw 16:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes well done. Now that my ban is over, please stop tracking my edits. It is becoming a nuisance and is not in the interests of wikipedia. While verifying edits is important, just back up OK? It is very immature. Eedo Bee 07:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

User:GymLeader_Dalton

Thanks for un-vandalizing my boring page which hardly ever gets vandalized. I turned in the user [1] to an admin already. I don't bother fighting with them anymore. Wahkeenah 17:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for un-vandalizing it again. I see he picked up on my comment, so I'm assuming he's watching with glee. He'll be blocked soon. Wahkeenah 17:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Oppose, eh? Well, that can be expected, what with our rather...unpleasant business a few months back. I'm sorry about that. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 17:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for undoing the Revision as of 02:42, 12 December 2006 (edit) by 64.107.190.194 on Edward Szczepanik. I appreciate your work as a recent changes patroller! Tom Szczepanik 23:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Spamming accusation

I'm not quite sure if this is the right way to message you. I got a message from you saying i was spamming because I posted an article about a book i just wrote. Why is putting a link to my book any different from the other books there on the same subject? I thought that it was ok to include links to books that related to the subject? The Anatomy of Mona Lisa is about the Mona Lisa, why is it considered "Spamming" to include it as a book on the mona lisa page? If it's ok could you please list it? I am not spamming —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Itsjustlife (talk • contribs).

User:Eedo Bee

Thanks for stepping in and blocking Eedo Bee. I had hopped that he had merely misunderstood what project tagging meant and that the argument could be resolved through discussion. It is a shame he decided to re-emphasise his hostility to LGBT issues on his userpage and tag the Pedophilia article in response. He could no doubt have been a valued contributor had he stayed away from areas in which he had such strong feelings. Ah well, his choice. You made the right call, regretable though it is. WJBscribe 02:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Eedo's Matmice article

I notice you Prodded it. While he is not one of my favorite editors, could you consider removing the PROD until his block has expired? I have no doubt that the article will never survive Afd, no matter how long anyone works on it, but at least he will have had a chance at it. Jeffpw 10:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Another thanks (you seem to be collecting them)

Thanks for reverting vandalism to my userpage! —Remember the dot (t) 03:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank You and Semi Protection

Hey Gwernol, Thank You for reverting the Vandalism on my Userpage and also....do you think you could Semi-Protect the Ninja article because of Non-stop IP Vandalism! §†SupaSoldier†§ 19:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Range block

Do you know of a way to do a range block? There is an ip that keeps replacing juimbos pages with a mans ass. the first 3 octets are the same only the final number is changing. I am going to assume the subnet has 256 possible address. 59.91.253.80 , 115. I am not saying that a range block is appropriate here but should the same ip address patern continue, is there a way to impose a short term range block? Thanks! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I found the reading useful and all those networking classes actually paid off (i.e. i understand it!) Thanks, i will exercise extreme caution should I choose to use such a block. Thanks for the ptompt reply. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 21:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Great job

You must do a great job because you piss off vandals and get your page vandalized all the time! The vandals are cowering in fear! Keep up the good work (I am sure the userpage vandalism does not even phase you. lol). -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 01:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Gwernol, I have said it before and will say it again. In the light of the amount of vandalism coming your way, fully protecting your userpage would be wholly reasonable.--Anthony.bradbury 11:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism Reversion

Hey. Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. I appreciate it. Kriak 00:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Indef block

Not sure if you saw this, but User:ReggiN kcid's last placement of the block template was done before your post (3:10 vs. 3:11). Thus he didn't disregard your warning (since he didn't add it again between the time you warned him and the time you blocked him). If you knew that already, sorry to be a bother, but I personally don't see a problem with giving him another chance. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 03:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hah, never mind. I just saw his last comment; keep the block on him. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 03:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Just to add to this, this gay just left me a, banned from editing label...odd Gavin Scott 03:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism and warning

Just a heads up that I reverted a vandal attack on your page, and gave the offender a level 3 warning. Akradecki 04:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Review

Gwernol, thank you for your comments. You highlight two failings which I was aware of, and am working to overcome; a tendency to get annoyed with vandals who attack pages which I regard as sacrosanct, such as Auschwitz concentration camp, and a tendency not to sign if I get excited (though I usually go back, sign and apologise). I shall get there.--Anthony.bradbury 22:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi.

You're an admin, right? Can you please delete the page Team environment? I put the prod template on a few days ago, but it was taken off (despite the article being patent nonsense). Thanks for your help. Abeg92contribs☃ 02:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, thank you for your policy guidance. Your help is appreciated. Abeg92contribs☃ 03:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

How to site my sources?

i was just wondering how do i site my sources? because i thought they meant put it on the wikipedia page but i guess i thought wrong... please fill me in on how to site my sources you wrote me saying i added spam and advertisement wich was not my intention please write me back and let me know! thanksMatteo747 05:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the revert of my userpage (again!!) and for the sprotect - much appreciated! :) - Alison^✍ 11:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

64.107.220.161

Can you please put an end to this nonsense? You blocked this person, but take a look at the talk page history. (jarbarf) 15:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Sock of User:Jeff Dorlean

I noticed you were the blocking admin for User:Macdaddys, a sockpuppet of Jeff Dorlean. I've come across another editor with identical edits who I believe is also a sockpuppet of this person. User:Ashley Chiles has already been blocked for 24 hours, but may need another look. Being unable to find a sock report, I hope you can take a look. Thanks, auburnpilot talk 18:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Block of 207.228.211.35

On Friday, I reported User:207.228.211.35 (see debate User_talk:TigerShark#Barry_Bonds_et_al_). It had been 3 hours since his last edit so nothing was done. I see you must have caught him today. I am guessing that admins have some kind of tool to flag an IP adress so that when it edits you immediately check the content of the edit. Thus, I am guessing that my efforts are a part of the reason you finally caught the guy. Is it correct for me to claim any credit for catching this guy finally. Also, did you block his sock that I reported on Friday. Please respond to my talk page. TonyTheTiger 19:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey Gwernol

Hey Gwernol, How are ya? ;^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 01:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I noticed your revert of Squared World, and I was wondering...

Hi. I think you are perhaps more experienced than I in Wiki. Could you explain for me, either here or here, the reason why Squared World has a semi-protected tag, when it seems to lead to a web site consisting of a black holding page, no possibility of checking out notability or member stats, and does not Google in its own right when put into a search? Come to that, why isn't it on the rocky road to speedy delete? I've no axe to grind in particular, I just can't get over its transparent lack of notability. Any throwing of the smallest amount of light would be appreciated. Thanks. Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 20:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow! That WAS speedy! Forget it, and well done. Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 20:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply on my Talk. I have only just got used to the procedure for reporting serial vandals, I still have to get to grips with speedy delete nomination. You've a head start on me, of course, being Admin... Cheers. Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 20:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

=why does my tourism section keep on getting deleted?!

hi i made the changes you wanted me to make i got sources and everything BUT WHY DOES MY TOURISM SECTION KEEP ON GETTING TAKEN OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i really dont understand at all so if you could tell me what else did i do wrong.... because i really dont think i did anything wrong and im thinking that if you dont want to allow me to put some truth on that article that contains so much inaccurate information then you should just completely erase it the whole page! because im not just offended im am angry because whats true is not allowed on but the bunch of lies that are on there are welcomed.Matteo747 21:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Re:Vandal tagging

Thanks for message dear. I will try to be better then I am doing now and will work on your guide lines .Yeah some time I open too many windows so I often forget to sign.Next time i will be carefull .Thanks

Khalidkhoso 21:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Dear i can not identify some "subst". if you could help more regarding it . Khalidkhoso 21:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Got Your Point. Thanks Cheers Caio

Syndromeofadown 21:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Why you were blocking my friend? Now he will be deported because made unemployment by you and he leaving for Kyrgyzstan again next day. Maybe you abuse your administrator power. And stop doing that please for my friend he maybe never I see again. He is maybe tried for making more account and you dont again block him. I am angry for you already.

Askar

I'm sorry I write such things in my userpage, but my friend is deport now and maybe never I see again. I did not for personal attack. I dont know you yet maybe and I dont mean for attack.

Askar

3RR

Gwernol, will you please fully protect your userpage NOW, before I get caught for 3RR.--Anthony.bradbury 13:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

3RR doesn't apply to vandalism reverts. Personally I don't think there's any need to protect the page, there seem to be hundreds of people watching it for no apparent reason, myself included. Regards, CiaranG 13:37, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I posted a message on Antohys talk page about it. I also blocked the ip address. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

OK, whatever you say. I have been here for only a year (nearly), but have never seen such a concerted attack on anybody. As you are clearly aware, many of us are waqtching your page. --Anthony.bradbury 13:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

No problems. In fact I have protected it for a short while mainly to give all you very kind folks who have watchlisted my page a break. I have seen worse attacks (check out poor User:Metros232 for example) but do seem to annoy some vandals. I take it as a sign I'm doing a good job here :-) Best to you and a huge thanks to everyone who has been reverting the vandalism on my user page. Gwernol 13:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

OK boss.--Anthony.bradbury 17:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism??

You accuse me of vandalism of AIDS yet all I did was clean up to paragraphs to make them more readable and consise? I find you are very rude to say that my edits were "unhelpful and non-constructive".

Please do not add unhelpful and non-constructive information to Wikipedia, as you did to AIDS. Your edits could be considered vandalism, and they have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Gwernol 10:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hne123"

Kindly explain why you consider my changes to be vandalism or else undo your revert. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hne123 (talk • contribs).

Thank You

Thank You for Reverting the Vandalism on my Userpage, Gwernol! :^) :^) :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 16:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

yeah, me too! Philippe Beaudette 19:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Why

Why shouldn't I vandalize? I tried to help by uploading pictures to Mandisa only to have them be deleted without a reason as to why. It's not fair that the hard work I went through trying to find them was WASTED. -MFan3 01:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

The article Arnold Schwarzenegger is vandalized multiple times by different people. Would you consider protect or semi-protect it? Wooyi 04:07, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

DURAN DURAN

I feel extremely offended for being blocked from editing. I am not aware of my errors or as you call "vandalism". It would be greatly appreciated if you could unblock me and and give me a reason for you actions!! Thank you DuranDuran 06:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Lucas

Hello Gwernol. You were very kind to help with blocking Ludvikus last week. Just to let you know, as you were probably aware, there were actually two problems editors in this case, namely Ludvikus and Lucas. The latter has also been a problem lately on other philosophy-related articles. He has a history of blocks and disruptive editing, summarised here. Is there anything you can do? There are a number of good editors that I am trying desperately to keep on the philosophy project, but it is getting to much for them. Again, the page I referred to has full details. Thanks Dbuckner 07:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Editing the AIDS article

I see that some changes to the wording have been happening, and reversion of those changes, apparently without any discussion on the talk page. When there is disagreement about the wording of a section, please discuss the changes on the talk page. It's helpful to put descriptive edit summaries, which can refer to the talk page e.g. "see talk" or referring to a particular section of the talk page where those edits are being discussed. Editors are not supposed to just revert other people's good-faith changes without discussion or explanation. Rather than repeatedly reverting others' edits, editors are supposed to discuss until consensus is reached before making changes to disputed sections. See Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. I would appreciate seeing the disputed wording discussed in an organized manner so I can see what's going on. I'm putting this same message on a few users' talk pages. --Coppertwig 11:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I apologize; since you had already reverted your own reversion, directing the above comment to you was unnecessary. I was telling you things you already know. I think the other two users I directed the same comment to were new users -- it was intended more for them. I retract the above complaint and apologize for any inconvenience. --Coppertwig 13:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way: from my reading of the page history, I think Hne123 was editing the wording, not just re-ordering citations as you said in your edit history. --Coppertwig 14:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

64.107.220.164 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

When I saw the proxy block tag, I added it to Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies and indef blocked it per the open proxy policy, pending investigation. If you are sure that it is not an open proxy, then please unblock, and re-block for a time commensurate with protecting the vandalism. Also, I IPprotected the user talk page since the IP was vandalising the talk page as well. Thanks. -- Avi 16:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Ludvikus again

Would be grateful for any help. The community is utterly exhausted. See KD's message on User_talk:FT2. Many thanks. Dbuckner 19:28, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Gwernol. I know Ludvikus would like to perceive it as stalking, but I think you can understand other editors hoping that the agony will be less prolonged this time around. KD Tries Again 22:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)KD

Thanks also. Dbuckner 08:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Dear Gwernol

The issue was the Frankfurt school. The two historical figures you objected to pertain to the reaction of that school. The Frankfurt school was disillusioned by the prevalence of irrationality in Europe at the time. Anyway - I'm deeply disappointed by the level of attacks upon my person, and that this is not recognized. I'll do my best to keep away from Wikipedia - the behavior against my person is deeply disappointing. --Ludvikus 23:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Protection

Gwernol, although you say that you have wholly protected your userpage, this does not appear to be the case. I have checked, and am able to edit it, though I obviously have not done so. Now, as a special favour, just for me, please totally protect your user page. It is not a lot to ask!--Anthony.bradbury 20:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Possible semi-protection and he states it's whole or temporary full-protect. BuickCenturyDriver 01:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Clearly not so.--Anthony.bradbury 23:55, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

The messages about this are in danger of outnumbering the incidents themselves. I'm sure Gwernol is more than capable of using protection as he sees fit. May I suggest ignoring the clown, then he will stop performing. CiaranG 00:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

North America

Looks like you beat me to the punch on notifying the IP even thought I reverted. Thanks. BuickCenturyDriver 01:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Zoey 101

I did not express personal opinion. It was proved facts. Why did you feel the need to remove it? Babygurl13573 01:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Rudeness

Gwernol, am I allowed under wikipedia guidelines to send insulting messagtes to User:Ockenbock? I have so far refrained from doing so, but he is really starting to piss me off!--Anthony.bradbury 20:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I guess I knew that really. I have taken no action, except to revert your page once or twice, nor will I. But it is tempting and, as you know, I am occasionally excitable.--Anthony.bradbury 11:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

User page vandals

Hi. Can I just express my sympathies regarding this sudden merciless campaign on your user page? I, like many other editors, will be watching your page and reversing this mindless and childish disruption whenever I see it. Cheers. Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 20:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, i'd just like to say thank you for telling me what to do, i am not sure how to send u a message so i'll just use this. thanks again

Leonardo reference

Hi, Gwernol!

No discussion necessary! I wrote the sentence. And I added the reference.

The process was thus-

It has been changed twice by people who considered that it must be in error. So firstly, I referrenced the sentence. Then I decided that it was better to modify the sentence so that it people no longer disputed its accuracy. Having done that, it no longer need a specific reference. The whole Section has a covering reference at the bottom of the section.

I'm getting a little bit tired of well-meaning people continually changing things that have been very carefully stated, and improving on information that have been checked and double checked.

--Amandajm 04:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Stoopid of me!

I have just realised that the reference that I removed was the primary reference and removing it must have stuffed up every single reference to the same book! Thanks! --Amandajm 04:45, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

User 65.13.229.183

This account has continued to vandalize entries after you posted a warning message to him. I am confused whether to post a warning message on his Talk page (and, if so, which level of warning), so I'm passing that buck to you, since you're an Admin. Thanx! Caliban 11:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Brf00

Thank you for fixing. I was trying to figure out what I did to irritate this guy. It has to do with reverting (on 2 different occasions) his POV-pushing of placing a picture of some asian type burning a U.S. Flag, on the U.S. Flag page. In the talk page for U.S. Flag, I contended that it was offensive to show flag burning on any country's flag page, but that it could arguably be put on a page that specifically discusses flag burning. (Which User:ChrisO had already done, on 9/11/06). That minor debate was a month ago [2] so that guy's a little slow on the draw. Thank you for fixing my page, yet again. :) Wahkeenah 16:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Black people

Ok. if you like the article on "Black people" then do so. Now i have to go and talk to my Black friend /matrix17

Black people shouldnt have their OWN page

Its fine with me if wikipedia.org wants to realy make a statement and devide black and white people. and i sooo like the african masaj highest up on the black people article. /matrix17

was it you who just wrote sista pvarningen? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Matrix17 (talk • contribs).

Ok. but i have done that and i cant see who did it. its called Sista tillsägelsen. look if you can see. thanks/matrix17

Sorry what i ment was that someone has wrote that on my discussionpage and even if i look at the historypage i dont udnerstand who wrote that/ matrix17

mm i found it out myself in the end. but thanks for the help. /matrix17

United Kingdom

I'm laughing at the idea that I broke a Wikipedia policy by adding to the UK article that the UK's economy grew faster than any other major European economy since 1999 to present, which it did. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.109.86.234 (talk • contribs).

Recent vandalism to your userpage

Looks like you have a fan from Florida State University ([3]). Would a temporary range block for 128.186.159.* be possible? ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 19:24, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

• I sincerely hope so. I'm tired of reverting that idiot's nonsense. - Alison^✍ 19:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Euro statements in UK history section

Please see Talk:United Kingdom#The public generally favours keeping the Pound Sterling.... Thanks/wangi 23:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your recent block of 131.123.48.225

I commend your fine work in this situation and add that 131.123.48.225 is definitely not my IP address. Burpen 13:57, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:MerddinEmrys.jpeg

Was reviewing the FR Locomotives table and the picture against Merddin Emrys caught my eye since it looked the wrong colour. On detail look I note that is actually David Lloyd George. Main identifying features are the length of the nameplate, the "tomato soup" colour scheme and the narrow cab sheets. ==Stewart 19:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Anon user blanked your page

So I reverted it. --Matt J ^User|Talk 21:27, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

And he did it again at 22:17. Where are admins when you need urgent blocking carried out? Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 22:20, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I retract the above statement - that was pretty quick blocking! Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 22:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, good work by my fellow admins. Such a shame that a vandal continues to sully the name of Florida State University. Gwernol 22:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Frankly, I was pretty close to lodging a complaint with the FSU IS&T department after certain comments. I wouldn't normally do that, but that was just malicious. Not funny. - Alison^✍ 22:32, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Florida State University

Gwernol, it's your call; it's your page. But is it really not now time to contact the University, which I know we can do, and encourage them to discipline their students? Because it just goes on and on. Graduation day is, I guess, July/August some time? I did take note of your comment about them getting eventually bored. My question remains valid.--Anthony.bradbury 22:50, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm wondering about that and/or a range block on the University IPs. Gwernol 23:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Sensible course seems to be to contact the University, and, dependent on their reaction i.e. positive or negative reply, there then lies their future ability to edit Wikipedia or not, as a collective. Surely? Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 23:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

If contact with the university does not produce a useful response, then a six-month range block might make our point. No? --Anthony.bradbury 23:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible to do a one-month range block? All they need is a cooling off period, not 'cruel and unusual' punishment. Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 23:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, we can range block at any length. If we go down this road I think 1 month would be right in this instance, probably with account creation enabled to allow the legitimate editors to continue to work. Gwernol 23:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, fair enough. So long as it's long enough that everyone there gets the message. And yes, of course, let account-holders work. Do it now.--Anthony.bradbury 23:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll second that! - Alison^✍ 23:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Thirded (?) ! Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 23:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

The FSU range is currently blocked for 24 hours. We'll see what happens once that expires. Gwernol 00:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

He or she is back. -SpuriousQ (talk) 14:10, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I see there is now a week-long block. Any reply yet from the University regarding control or otherwise of the users of their IT equipment? Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 14:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

As you noted, I've range blocked the FSU IPs for one week. Nothing heard from the University. Gwernol 14:31, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Just a warning, I saw an FSU vandal a few minutes ago here. He's from 128.186.128.*, so that's out of the blocked range of 128.186.40/24. FSU seems to own the range 128.186.0.0/16. -SpuriousQ (talk) 01:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Bunch of vandalism on your user page from 128.186.159.* lately. Perhaps block 128.186.159/24 or 128.186/16. -SpuriousQ (talk) 04:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the Userpage Revert :)

Thanks Gwernol for reverting this piece of nonsense. Better check the vandal's talk page...he argues a very strong case for unblocking :P.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 02:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I had a look at his talk page - no reply registered there as to his block - where did he put his "argument" for unblocking if not here? Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 14:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I deleted it since it was clearly bad faith and contained a number of exceptionally nasty personal attacks. if you really want to see it, its in the history. Gwernol 14:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Eedo Bee (again)

Please see The ANI discussion. Jeffpw 07:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Syndromeofadown4

Please go to above as there is abuse posted. Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 18:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Already indefblocked. Gwernol 18:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see what you mean. Thanks, taken care of, Gwernol 18:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

On Personal Attacks

Dear Administrator Gwernol,

The following user claims to be a psychiatrist. He has made the following remarks about me. Do you consider them to be personal attacks at the Philo. Talk Page? If so, will you take the appropriate action?

Comment on Lukvikus

"The comments by Lukvikus at (17:52) seem digressive with incorrigible perseveration, there seems to be veiled hostile insinuation, the questions he raises have been exhaustively addressed already and I feel do not warrant further comment. Richiar 20:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)" Yours truly, --Ludvikus 20:23, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

PS1: What's the meaning of a "veiled hostile insinuation" alleged by self-described "psychiatrist" Richie?

PS2: Do you think it's appropriate for me to be "analyzed" by another Wikipedia editor?

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 20:28, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

"This user is certifiably completely normal"

"Just in case you missed it, I had entered a message earlier and it might get buried in the mass of information: "

"No, no hemlock my friend: maybe a round of drinks for all for this fine discussion ! I have done slightly more research since my posting of yesterday, and now can respond to your message here. 1) I am not formally trained in philosophy, I have my hands full as it is, but I find I cannot function very effectively in this world without some grasp of philosopy, so I try to educate myself, and this Wikipedia effort is commendable. 2) I was not making an accusation as you state above, but experssing a personal concern that came from a momentary impression just at the time when I dropped into the discussion. I wish to now say publicly that I withdraw my concern, and that I am convinced the issues being discussed are from people with sound minds. The debate is legitimate, and the discussion is legitimate. There is some emotionally charged expression which may have rendered the appearance of fanaticism, which is what may have triggered my concerns, but a little bit of communication and research has cleared this up for me. I would formally like to withdraw the concern about Bipolar Disorder. Please, everyone do continue with your work on the discussion here. Richiar 02:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)"

"At the time I jumped in, Dbruckner had just made an internal link to the Elders of Zion, and I looked at that, and thought it seemed freaky; then I went to your user page, and saw all of these repetive links to Wittgenstein, and it felt like I had entered some freaky shrine, but then I noticed a connection to Andy Warhol, and perused some of the communications, and now I feel quite at home: either everyone is as sick as I am, or we're all quasi-normal. Cheers for philosophers !! I definitely think I can learn from you. Richiar 06:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)"

Above is User:Richiar's prior "certification" as to my "normalcy". I'm very curious as to whether you consider this a "personal attack" on my person by another Wikipedian. --Ludvikus 20:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

So to consider someone as possibly suffering from "bi-polar disorder" is an "extremely mild incivility", and not a personal attack? --Ludvikus 20:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Dear Administrator Gwernol,

I am a minority voice on the Philosophy Talk page. I have successfully written & edited literaly hundreds of Wiki pages elsewhere. Nowhere have I had the trouble I've had as at Philosophy. It is actually a very difficult subject to write about. If you look, you will find that I'm no longer making any changes to the actual page - as this may upset the majority. If you also look around, you will find that Administrator User:Mel Etitis and I have successfully written a page together on John Passmore.

At this point (through your prompting) I have completely re-read the Wiki policy statement as to what constitutes a "personal attack". And I am completely surprised that you believe that describing, or evaluating, someone in psychiatric terms does not constitute a personal attack on Wikipedia. If it does not, than it should! Do you really mean that if I call someone (Wiki editor) "crazy" you will not ban me from Wikipedia - at least for a day? I think describing someone in any psychological/clinical terms is a personal attack. And if you think not, can we get a third opinion on it? --Ludvikus 21:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps this may be helpful to the issues: User:Richiar describes himself as (1) having no particular knowledge regarding Philosophy, and (2) that he's a lay psychiatrist (who has also taken a break once to take his "Prosac", he once informed us). His contribution appears to be to engage in psychological evaluation of contributors - me personally. Is that not "bizarre" Wikipedia behavior? And you do not consider that a personal attack? What I've shown you is that it is his practice to analyze my contributions from the standpoint of psychiatry. And you only think that that's an extremely mild incivility? --Ludvikus 21:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Here's what you first said to me today:

  "No, I don't think they are personal attacks since they comment on your actions,
  not on you as a person. At the most they are extremely mild incivility
  and I don't intend to take action. Gwernol 20:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)"

Is that not accurate as to what you think? Yours truly, --Ludvikus 21:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

A Train's RFA

I notified him. I'm puzzled at as claiming to be an admin, but no RFA. Uninsureddriver 21:27, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi this is the person who messed with ribosomes, i am writing in here because i dont know how to leave a message, i just want to say i am sorry

. Rationalism vs. Empiricism First published Thu 19 Aug, 2004

  The dispute between rationalism and empiricism concerns the extent to which we are dependent upon
  sense experience in our effort to gain knowledge. Rationalists claim that there are significant
  ways in which our concepts and knowledge are gained independently of sense experience.
  Empiricists claim that sense experience is the ultimate source of all our concepts and knowledge.
  
  Rationalists generally develop their view in two ways. First, they argue that there are cases
  where the content of our concepts or knowledge outstrips the information that sense experience
  can provide. Second, they constuct accounts of how reason in some form or other provides
  that additional information about the world. Empiricists present complementary lines of thought.
  First, they develop accounts of how experience provides the information that rationalists cite,
  insofar as we have it in the first place. (Empiricists will at times opt for skepticism as an
  alternative to rationalism: if experience cannot provide the concepts or knowledge the rationalists
  cite, then we don't have them.) Second, empiricists attack the rationalists' accounts of how reason
  is a source of concepts or knowledge.

And by the way, no Wikipedian Philosophy editor has presented any cited support that Rational[ity] is unrelated to Reason. So we must take Rational Enquery as in fact dependent on Reason.

It's very odd - to say the least - to see Rationality and Reason revived by Wikipedia. So what is this mysterious Rational Enquiry which has nothing to do with Rationalism, or Reason?

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 01:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

My mistake - for some reaso, I thought I was on the Philosophy Page when I was here.

And smart attitude, I might add - keeping away from the Philosophy Page. Had I done the same, I would have had more Wiki friends than enemies - don't let yourself be dragged in - into that quicksand page of troubles. --Ludvikus 17:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Please see User_talk:PraderWilliSyndromes for comments

He created his user talkpage with disparaging comments directed your way. FYI. Ronbo76 06:11, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

And he's also posted abuse on his User page. Can't you justifiably blank it? Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 11:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Another of a series of sockpuppet accounts, in the KKKondom and Syndromeofadown series. I've indef blocked it as another abusive sockpuppet. The odd thing is I've no idea who this user is, but clearly he has a bit of a problem. Oh well, Gwernol 12:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Nicaragua & Related Articles

Hi. I wanted to drop you a question comment about user 190.53.15.171. I am relatively new to Wikipedia and trying to clean up some of the POV and vanalism that seems to pervade the Nicaragua artilce and others relating to Nicaragua. Particularly problematic is this user (190.53.15.171). He/she continues to change the article and add irrelevant and biased info. I notcied you had added a warning in their talk area but they pay no mind to it. There is also people trying to make it a toursim and Nicaragua promotional site. Any though on how to handle this situation?--Agrofe 14:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Talyllyn Railway page.

Hello mate, I'm not a great Wikipedia user so I apologise if I've deleted someone elses work.

Regarding my edits of the Talyllyn Railway page: The Talyllyn is a state of decline. It loses more passengers every year, year on year. To say that it is a popular and well-liked railway does not reflect the reality of the situation that the railway is facing. It is a poor performer in a area heavily used by tourists. I believe that what I wrote was accurate and your edits only paint a picture that does reflect the railway itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.106.90 (talk • contribs)

Surely though what you put is also pure speculation and pushing the POV that the TR is a successful and popular railway when the truth of the matter is not. I resent your remarks regarding my involvement with narrow gauge railways. I have been a volunteer on the Talyllyn Railway since 2000 and an ardent supporter of the Ffestiniog Railway. Who are you to cast asertions and judgements about my experience on the narrow gauge railway scene in Wales? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.106.90 (talk • contribs)

Ludvikus yet again

I am sure you're heartily sick of the subject, but Ludvikus continues to harrass and browbeat editors: [[4]]. I see you had a dose of it yourself above. I think we all know he's not going to stop of his own accord. Sorry to bother you again. KD Tries Again 19:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)KD

Just noticed this untrue charge against me. Saying that I "harrass" and "browbeat" is plainly untrue - if you look at the remark I made, in response to Db's prior comment.

It is depressing to find such dishonest remarks about me - in this secret effort to get you to take action against me.

I came to your page because someone made a comment about you on my page - and I do not kmow why.

Have a nice day. --Ludvikus 05:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Wales

Hi, I just tried to reorganise the Wales page but I see that you reverted the changes for some reason. This has caused the page to become quite distorted if you have a look now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.77.39 (talk • contribs).

Wales

Can I just ask why you have taken away the part of Wales history 'medieval Wales' and 'nationalist revival'? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.77.39 (talk • contribs).

Wales

For your information I haven't deleted anything from the Wales page and was just tidying up the history section which you immediately revert for no reason. Also the section on the economy you have changed it to say 'Wales does not attract high value added jobs' - this is your POV please use links to support that argument. Also you say Cardiff is significantly small, please support that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apple 123 (talk • contribs)

User page

Thanks for the reverts. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:52, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

82.144.243.116

Hi. Any quick way for you to report this idiot? It'll take me ages. He just went to five (at least) vandalisms (last one - Bryan Robson). Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 23:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Impostle???

Gwernol, I've heard you called lots of things, but "impostle"?? Is that like "apostle"? I've been keeping a quiet eye on Thomas for a while, now, and just couldn't resist sharing a chuckle over that one. Akradecki 02:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You should block the editing of Christian brothers College High School, due to vandals.

Another category

Hello, Jesusmyth has created the category Category:Bahá'í prophets. I was wondering if the previous discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 4 regarding Category:Manifestion of God covers this new category as well, especially given that the Baha'i concept never really calls these people prophets, which is a different concept. Regards, -- Jeff3000 03:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

hey

hey, gwernol it's patelco and i need some help. first of all, my talk page2 was recently vandalised by a guy named: User: Mad Game1. I also know that mad game is a sock puppet of User: Korean history. but, please do not block korean history3. anyway, hopefully this problem can be resolved.

- ₪Patelco☻ 04:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

1= User: Mad Game

2= User talk: Patelco

3= User: Korean History

I reverted back to your last reversion; I see only vandalism since.--Anthony.bradbury 18:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Ludvikus again

I made a suggestion to Banno here. I would welcome your thoughts on the matter. The question is, not the behaviour of this particular user, but the methods in general available to deal with this sort of disruption. Welcome your views. Dbuckner 08:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

And still it goes on. See the Talk:Philosophy page. He is now starting to edit the article again with nonsense comments that we are having to revert. Plus strange rambling comments on the talk page, veiled invective against users. PLEASE DO SOMETHING I IMPLORE YOU. Dbuckner 06:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the message you sent me aboutthat transport museum, i was not awear that i had nominated it but i think i had left my computer (logged in on wikipedia) and i think my brother went and changed it, sorry for teh Inconvenience User:Robin99 15:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

please?

User talk:V2ja vandalised again after his final warning. could you please block him/her? thanks. :-) Ilikefood 22:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Important: Minor user needs help

I got the following message on my talk page. From my scans, we have a minor who believes he or she is about to be blocked or have their user account deleted from the system. However, because of the minor status, it appears someone only wants them to rework their user page to remove private information. I gather older edits would then be deleted. Any suggestions? I am learly of jumping is as others have already attempted to explain what is going on without success. Will (Talk - contribs) 03:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

*crying* HELP ME!

some one wants me gone! i did nonthing wrong! please help me! i dont wana go will i want to stay! please talk to them! please!--Lolicon(Down With Child Porn)Saikano 07:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC-6)

User 70.176.14.107

Could you check the recent edits of this user please - you last warned him/her on 10 February, but as far as I can see, most of the edits since than have been unconstructive. I don't know whether you feel an immediate block is appropriate, or another warning.– Tivedshambo (talk) 06:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

User: 70.88.10.41

I noticed that this user has been vandalizing recently and that you have warned him a few times in the past. Could you please block this user from Wikipedia. Thanks.Hurleyman 13:02, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Club Penguin article rewrite request

Hi Gwernol. I believe you were the admin who semi-protected the Club Penguin article - thanks, someone needed to. Having looked through the article, a lot of the content does not appear to be encyclopedic, merely a game guide written by kids. Also, the talk page is getting ridiculous - I've seen sections asking about the Lighthouse game. I don't want to seem harsh on new Wikipedians, but if you've got some time, I really think this article needs a re-write and continued semi-protection. Don't worry if you can't, but do you think this is a good idea? --Jatkins 18:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

User:manstaruk

Hi DC- hope u enjoyed your visit. Have add u to r contribs page for the photos & additions you have done. Cheers Keith 18:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Greetings

Hello. You don't know me but I stumbled on your page checking Ronbo 76's page history, because of vandalism. Anyway, I saw you were an admin and was hoping you could help me. My situation, described below in my original AIV and Noteboard posting on the incident, has gone unresolved up to this point and I was hoping, perhaps, through direct personal interaction with an admin I might be able to get some assitance.

Original report: Situation: First I filed a report at AIV, which this situation was beyond the scope of. Here is the original report.

• JazzButcher (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Kinda long. I would like someone to monitor this situation. This user has continually inserted information about a non notable arcade into the DeKalb, Illinois article. Two editors have explained why it shouldn't be there, this action screams of an attempt to use the Wiki as an advertising service. After the explanation it was reinserted and a long screaming post appeared unsigned on my talk page from the user. The information first turned up about two weeks ago from anonymous 71.57.61.191 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), which was warned once. After the user Jazz reinserted the info I did give him a harsh warning. If someone could please monitor this situation I would appreciate it.A mcmurray 12:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Essentially this user is asserting notability for a non notable random business. See my talk page and his. I am trying to defend the Wiki against what I see as obvious spam. I mean the information he was inserting was ambiguous and ended with something like "the owner serves his guests a big bowl of popcorn." I was unsure of what to do so here I am. Any help? Thanks ahead of time.A mcmurray 03:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Basically I was hoping someone could watch this situation and/or explain it to the user. I am not quite sure how to.A mcmurray 13:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I unsure of how to approach this because the user brought me back two sources and placed them on my talk page, I am not even sure I am citing the correct policies here. I am trying to defend the Wiki against obvious spam, any help would be greatly greatly appreciated. Thanks ahead of time, your partner in Happy Editing, A mcmurray 18:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Housecleaning

The article needs to be called Housecleaning. It was only categorized as a workpage since it's not finished. It's title needs to be reserved somehow, and since it was only categorized as work page I see nothing wrong with it being called Housecleaning. Furthermore, somebody deleted three of its illustrations, and they need to be undeleted, because there are needed for the article. Therefore, please undelete the Images and put the article back into the name Housecleaning where it belongs. Chuck Marean 21:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to Example. As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. The process of mediation is voluntary and focuses exclusively on the content issues over which there is disagreement. Please review the request page and the guide to formal mediation, and then indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you, [signature]

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chuck Marean (talk • contribs).

Request for block

Can you please block 66.228.70.170. If you check his user page, he is continuing to vandalize. I reverted one of his pieces of vandalism, but it is obvious if you look at his/her "contribs" they are up to no good. user:reds0xfan 2 mar 2007

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Housecleaning. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 16:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

Thanks

Thanks for the super fast action. As always you are a star. Alun 06:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Eoganan is back as User:69.157.100.203 [5] and possibly User:65.92.92.95 who may be a meatpuppet.[6] Alun 08:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Also User:69.157.108.162 contribs who is also User:Pan-ethnic contribs. The IP edits Pan-ethnic's user page, it's the same IP as Eoganan, and Pan-ethnic reverts Eoganan's edits. I have been freely reverting these edits. I am assuming that reverting the edits of a user evading a block cannot break the three revert rule (I have heard this before), am I correct in that assumption? Alun 13:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi

I am NOT Eoganan and I am pissed off that I cant even edit on here. I have already filed a complaint to other admins with the block on my IP. Just because I have facts and knowledge that is the TRUTH and stops the destructive and extremist views of other users like Wobble is not reason for me to banned. Neither is the fact that I know Eoganan (James) and you mistaking him for me just because I know him. I am not Eoganan and if you dont like it, you can go fuck yourself. You know I'm right. Not eoganan 08:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Narrow gauge railways in Saxony

Hi Gwernol, you have changed article name "List of narrow gauges in Saxony" (linked to de:Liste der Schmalspurbahnen in Sachsen) to "Narrow gauge railways in Saxony" (currently re-linked by anonymous user to de:Sächsische Schmalspurbahnen). I suggest to keep the current stub as a list, I suggest to change its name to "List of narrow gauge railways in Saxony" and link it to de:Liste der Schmalspurbahnen in Sachsen. I consider the list helpful, it is easier to understand for users with elementary level of English and also easier to translate to other languages (I would like to make a Czech version some day). Regards JanSuchy 09:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Spamstar of Glory

		The Spamstar of Glory
		To Gwernol for diligence in the tireless battle against Spam on Wikipedia. --Hu12 17:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for your tireless efforts in keeping article clear of spam and other nonsense. Wikipedia is a better quality project because of hardworking and conscientious editors like you!--Hu12 17:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

NPOV Message

I noticed the NPOV policy messages you put on User_talk:Stevo6969. I would like to use the messages myself for times when I notice similar unhelpful contributions. The question is, what do you type into a user's talk page so that this message will appear? Mrug² 01:56, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry about the Bob Saget edit. Someone else was using my computer and was not aware of the finer points of Wikipedia. 128.211.177.36 02:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit warring

Do I appear to be in an edit war on the article of Iran? I don't believe I have broken the 3RR on it. I hope you gave the same warning to Pejman too? Usergreatpower 17:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC) I just checked and no you haven't given him the same warning. Why? Usergreatpower 17:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Bus routes

How do I create proper Infoboxes and can you help me with my bus routes and not delete them.CourtneyBonnick 22:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

LFC editing summary

Yeah, I can't help it sometimes when things piss me off, and this is an example of it, an example that always seems to happen. People keep messing with that opening all the time, adding and taking things off, and it takes the piss so much! OMFG! People need to make the ultimate one, then leave it alone. The latest pathetic retarded change of many is that someone's took off about Liverpool F.C. and the rest of the English clubs were banned from UEFA Club Competition, with LFC's being a bit more than the rest though. Goodbye! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mazito (talk • contribs).

Vermont revert

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that I thought that 159.105.61.207's edit was spam too, but I checked both links and the one they changed from www.travel-vermont.com to www.vermontvacation.com are both the same. I just thought you would want to know... :) -- Whereizben - Chat with me 18:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The View

I did receive your comment about The View. I don't agree with your statement. I can cite that if you need to. [7] Also, you can watch the video on youtube at [8] This information is not a matter of opinion, but it is factual and I believe that we should quote her in The View. 1312020wikicop 18:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I will go ahead and do that but without the last phrase, something to the extent of "Rosie O'Donnell has stated that 'radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America.'"

Thanks, 1312020wikicop 18:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

How am I ruining the George Bush's talk page?

Seriously, all I did was tell them what is going on, if you are pro-bush and do not want to face the cold hard facts then that's your problem buddy, now if you excuse me I'll put back what I said, now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.117.224.10 (talk) 02:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

an AfD repost...or a memory glitch re: Tanya Foxx article

Bad memory glitch for me??? The article creator has a history of NN articles which were either AfD'd or Speedy D'd. I was sure this one went through the "long road". Was it a speedy? If neither then I guess I need another cup of coffee to perk my memory up. The article is definitely a {prod} if anything. Like the creators other articles it shades WP:BIO and WP:NN pretty thinly. 156.34.142.110 15:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

While on the topic of reposts...this article, Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Guitarists of All Time has been around before and, I believe, deleted after an AfDdue to the "copyvio-ness" of reprinting a published list. I say it's a repost....but with my earlier mem lapse....I thought I'd better check with you to see if I was right. Pondering deeply I almost think this article has been re-posted/deleted before. But, I could be wrong. Thanks for your time. 156.34.142.110 18:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I think the copyvio part comes into play as it's just a copy/paste of Rolling Stone's already published list. The previous version of the article actually veered away from the actual list and turned into a POV push for all the "notables" who didn't make the list....And the edit war that went along with it. I have no problem with the article, I just wanted to make sure rules were being adhered to. Thanks for looking into it. Have a nice day! 156.34.142.110 19:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Euromasters

Hi, I agree that the album listing indicates notability. It wasn't there when I tagged the article. It's amazing what sort of information comes to light when an article is tagged! Cheers. --Butseriouslyfolks 18:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Seema Luthra

In this edit summary, you state: (The article does make an assertion of notability. Please take this to AfD).

The article read, and still reads, in its entirety:

"Seema Luthra is an Indian Congress party candidate for Delhi."

According to WP:BIO, notability of politicians is established as follows:

Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislatures.

Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage.

Just being an elected local official does not guarantee notability.

So how and where does the article assert notability?

--Butseriouslyfolks 20:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Respectfully, I think you may have misread the article. It does not claim that this person is a candidate for the Indian Congress Party. It claims that this person is a candidate from the Indian Congress Party. The cited news article states that she lost the election. ("Trounced" is the word used in the cited article.) I strongly believe that we are required to refer to WP:N in making speedy determinations. Note that WP:N is incorporated into the language of the deletion template itself:

• "it is an article about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or website that does not assert the importance or significance of the subject." (Note the linked page.)

Otherwise, what are we using as a guide other than our subjective interpretation of the contributor's subjective assessment of whether the subject is notable? Why is the fact that Johnny is "brave" any less notable than the fact that this person is a candidate? All it takes to become a candidate is signatures from 10-20 people. Bravery is something you have to be born with. --Butseriouslyfolks 21:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Colleges

Hi there; I am, of course, aware of the standard warning re anonymous vandalism, six-month blocks and communication with Principals as related to vandalism from multiple ISP sites identified as schools and colleges. Do we actually ever do this? Because you must by now have been vandalised by everey student in North America! And yes, I do recall your saying that it flushes the vandals out of the woodwork. But it must be annoying for you.--Anthony.bradbury 20:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Block

Re. User:Chimpanda. You might want to check the logs as I don't think the indefblock happened - Alison^☺ 00:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Just as a follow up to this, I've just realised by looking at Chimpanda's indef tag on my talk page, the users a sock of User:Lolhat who I indef blocked earlier today. Cheers for the block Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 01:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

"Zionist disinformation agent"

Does that pay well? Because I reverted the ridiculous claims on the Borat page the earlier this week, so I sure wanna get in on this action :) WookMuff 01:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, the pay is wonderful. I actually am Sacha Baron Cohen. I'm an anti-semitic, pro-Zionist, Jewish, anti-Zionist, pro-Nazi, German, Arab, Pro-Semitic Double agent of the Iranian-US-Israeli world conspiracy against everyone. We rule the world, cause all the naughty things that happen all in the cause of taking over the world. I'm also a Gnome of Zurich. :-) Gwernol 01:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Forget Zionist disinformation agent, I now wanna be a gnome of zurich... thats where the REAL money is! WookMuff 01:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, you can't be a gnome of Zurich, we are a very exclusive group of secret rulers of the world. Most of the rabbles that secretly rule the world let anyone join, but we're very picky. Now, please excuse me, I have to get back to counting all my money and conspiring the take over the world /pinky and the brain. Gwernol 01:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Man, I thought all you had to do was give the gnome some of your treasure... lied to again "ZORK II!!!" (ala "KHAAAAAAAAAN") WookMuff 01:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

unblocking problem

Thanks man, I'm unblocked now! I don't know what was wrong, but thanks for your assistance! --GoIrish24 02:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry man, I was just experimenting... Cheers dude! --Domo Arigato, Mrs. Robato 03:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Advice, please

Gwernol, when I go for RfA it is, I suspect, virtually certain that Someone will pick up on the obvious fact that I have virtually no involvement in image manipulation; largely because for the articles which I have submitted, very few or no images are available. Questions; do you think this will be a problem, and should I make a pre-emptive declaration about it in my optional statement? I am also low in template work, but I see that as a specialist field which I have not attempted to enter.--Anthony.bradbury 11:49, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. As you know, apart from article-writing, which I continue to do, my main areas of expertise and interest are vandal-fighting in all its aspects, and in newby-helping. (Also spend time in AfD and RfA). I will take your advice and make an appropriate declarative statement along these lines when/if I am nominated for RfA.--Anthony.bradbury 12:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

67.83.153.55

Hi Gwernol,

You blocked this user a month ago for persistent spamming on the Google Pack article. The user is back and has continued in the same fashion with all edits being to spam the same article. Could a longer block be instituted? Thanks. -- Siobhan Hansa 13:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Reverting my talk page?

Hi Gwernol. I'm puzzled by your reversion of something Middle Eastern left on my talk page.[9] Can you explain? There's some whacked-out stuff there, including fan mail from Kiyosaki the crank – but I like to think it's a free-speech zone in the broadest sense.

I reverted your revert, with I must admit a rather snappish edit summary. It's now occurred to me that perhaps Middle Eastern was in violation of policy, maybe for 'campaigning' on talk pages or something. If this is the case, go ahead and revert it back, but can you please also leave a note explaining the relevant policy? And please also accept my apologies for my snippy edit summary. Cheers. [10]--G-Dett 15:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

What are the two steps I've missed?

And why couldn't you have just fixed it for me, instead of deleting it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hoponpop69 (talk • contribs).

User:Middle Eastern

It's not an anonymizing service, it's simply his IP, the one he used before, and the one he used for a number of other socks. He wrote the unblock list in February, pretending to be someone else, and claiming that the IP was "shared by 10 houses". Now he's claiming it's an anonymizer. Neither story was true. Jayjg ^(talk) 11:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

hoponpop69

you recently warned hoponpop69 for his conduct in the dicussion part of the blink 182 article, could i please also refer you to that same articles history, where he uses insults in the edit summary. Olir 17:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

wondering if..

you could take a look at developments on User:MiddleEastern's page. there was a sense that perhaps the whole thing was a big misunderstanding and as you were the first admin to check it out, I thought it would be good for you to swing by if you have a chance. Tiamut 17:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:UW future?

Hi Gwernol,

Sorry for the blatant spam, but you have yourself down as interested at WikiProject user warnings WP:UW. There is a discussion on going here that might be of interest to you about the future of this project. There are two strawpolls on the talk pages and the second one is about the future of the WP:UW project. Now we have the end in sight we are looking at wrapping up the project and merging it with Template messages/User talk namespace WP:UTM and creating a one stop shop for all userspace template issue. As you have yourself down as interested in this project we thought you may have some input on this issue, and would like you to visit the discussion and give any thoughts you may have on the matter. Cheers ^Khukri 10:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Gwernol, I am slightly embarrassed to ask this. You will, I know, recall that you were kind enough to undertake a semi-formal edit review for me, whih as I understand it you found essentially satisfactory. You were also kind enough to say that on my return from holiday, which happened on March 4th, you would consider nominating me for RfA. I know that you have yourself been on wikibreak, because I am one of the editors living on your userpage reverting mindless edits. I really dislike the concept of self-nomination, although I know it is widespread. I also quite dislike canvassing for nomination, and do so only becausae of your previous spontaneous offer. If you now find reason to withdraw this offer I will absolutely understand.--Anthony.bradbury 23:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Gwernol, I've decided to nominate Anthony (sorry!), I've emailed you about it anyway Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your block on 204.185.75.130

Why is the User_talk:204.185.75.130 user talk page semi-protected? I feel that it is unnecessary to protect that user page. Thanks in advance! --Spixels 18:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Protect conflict

Woops D: We both protected that troll's userpage at the same time, but I did indef. Should we even reinstate the expiry?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Gwernol, however it goes, I would like now to express my deep and heartfelt thanks, without waiting for the result, for your truly supportive comment. Thank you.--Anthony.bradbury 00:10, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Last yime I made a really stupid answer to a supplementary question, late at night, and there was no way home. This time I hope to convince the community that I have a positive value.--Anthony.bradbury 00:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Range block of the FSU vandal

Hi Gwernol. I'm seriously considering a range block on the FSU vandal, based on all known IP addresses and limiting the subnet mask as tight as possible to prevent collateral damage. It was Anthony above who precipitated that :) Too many editors are wasting their time reverting them and a month-long range block would stop them. Needless to say, I'll bring this up on WP:ANI first, but I'd love your input, seeing as you're bearing the worst of this (today again!). I'm a newbie admin now so be gentle! - Alison^☺ 00:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Gwernol, interested to see your changes one Harry Potter-will probably notify my friends. I didn't realise how much trouble vandalism caused, I'm very sorry. I'm only leaving a message, beacuse I'm a member of the Corris railway too.

Request to delete redundant article

In an attempt to increase the information about railway suppliers, I recently created the Union Switch and Signal article. Somehow, the already-existing Union Switch & Signal article didn't show up in my Wikipedia search. By chance, I later found the older article. Since I was the only contributor to the new article, I moved all of its text to the original article. I then deleted all that text in my article and left a note explaining what I had done. I would appreciate it if you could delete the redundant article. Thanks. Truthanado 15:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I've made Union Switch and Signal redirect to Union Switch & Signal. There were actually a couple of articles that linked to Union Switch and Signal, but I've now altered them so that they link directly to Union Switch & Signal. Signalhead 15:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Many Thanks Truthanado 16:23, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		This barnstar is for your amazing anti-vandalism work! I have seen your name many times in my recent changes patrol. Keep up the great work:) James, La gloria è a dio 19:23, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Impersonator

I'll let you figured out what you'd like to do about it, but I wanted to let you know that ColdDiablo is currently transcribing your userpage. Not sure if (s)he thinks (s)he's an admin, but (s)he also left a block notice (not in your name) at User talk:Warofdreams. ShadowHalo 02:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

What?

What are you talking about? I Didn't vandalize the Wesley Clark page! I got rid of the vandalism on that page!! The vandalism included things like "he was getting raped by Vietnamese soldiers", which I got rid of! The right person who did this is still probably still at large. I have found the IP and it is 24.211.162.129 68.102.104.55 02:47, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Warning

I am sorry, but I think you misunderstood the situation at Turkey: it is not an edit-war, it is vandalism. I have already filed a report at requests for page protection. There is a user who is single-handedly vandalizing both Turkey and Armenia (the latter was protected by User:Khoikhoi for the same reason) and User:El C protected Turkey two days ago for the same reason, and me and a bunch of editors have been busy reverting this user who keeps resurrecting himself repeatedly.. There is no content dispute in reality.. Baristarim 01:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

PS (I accidentally pasted this to your user page instead of your talk page, sorry about that!) Baristarim 01:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Not at all. "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia.". That user has indicated in his summaries [11] that he is making his edits per WP:POINT. That article is a Featured Article and a user who has used up 50+ or so accounts to get his point through in many articles by placing an irrelevant paragraph on top of the page, before anything else, is compromising the integrity of Wikipedia and that of one of its best articles. I am not going, nor should any Wikipedian, sit on his hands and let that happen. All I am saying is that it is vandalism if the edits are done per POINT by a user who has resurrected himself fifty times already without a legitimate content dispute taking place. Please see the article history to see what I mean (and that of Armenia). Baristarim 02:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Cowlyd & Eigiau

Hi Gwernol, Sorry, but your editing of Cowlyd & Eigiau Tramways is not correct. You have removed a chunk of the "Eigiau Tramway" and erroneously called it the "Cowlyd Tramway". This needs to be reverted - it was correct as it was. For detail on the Cowlyd Tramway, there is quite a bit on this under Llyn Cowlyd. By the way, the tramways are such an integral part of the story of the lakes/dams that I think they also deserve some mention in the main article, not just a "see also". I'm well busy right now, so will let you carry on. Hogyn Lleol 11:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Gwernol, I have now removed the tramway content of "Llyn Cowlyd" to "Cowlyd Tramway", a separate article, and have moved what _was_ under "Cowlyd Tramway" to "Eigiau Tramway", making it correct. Your content of "Eigiau Tramway" I have now put under "Cedryn Tramway" as I think the two need to be differentiated. All three might still need a bit of tidying - I'll have another look tomorrow - but at least it's all in the right place now. It would be great if you have any more detail on any of them ..... Regards, Hogyn Lleol 19:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use images

You've deleted an image on my Talkpage with the summary "Fair use images may not be placed on user talk pages." I'm sure you're right— why not?— but how did you ever come to find such a rule out? You can see that I'd be no good as an Administrator: I just don't have that kind of leisure, to be pursuing infractions. I have quite enough to do just cleaning off anonymous scribbles. --Wetman 12:00, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Gwernol , its ur mate droop. Sorry about the Vandilism , I didn't realise these were made public and it manly my brother mucking on my account. Sorry , I will never do it again. Don't block my account.

Dinofang

I've requested this user be blocked for putting fake barnstars on people's pages, and for general vandalism. After the work you put in reverting the guy's vandalism, i figured you'd be best placed to add something on WP:AIV to make sure another vandal bites the dust, as it were. Cheers, Jonomacdrones _(talk) 22:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Your work is appreciated, especially your revisions against vandals, cheers Lakers 23:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Yo dude!

Sup man! Hows it goin these days, blocking people. You make this page horrible. Block me go ahead, Ill start vandalzing on my computer, my laptop, my other computer, my cell phone, my other laptop, etc. HA! Take that =] =]...jake says hi. And advises you to fall off a bridge. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wikieditor is back (talk • contribs) 12:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

Sorry!

Dear Gwernol,

I am very sorry. Is this not the Wilkipedia? Please respond to me soon.

Sincerely,

Akmak03 15:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Gwernol, I did not intend to add nonsense to your usertalking page. Upon further review, I have realized that you are correct--this is the "Wikipedia", not the "Wilkipedia". I apologize for this error; however, it was a rather easy one to make. What's more, I was only trying to improve the Wikipedia page by doing what I thought was correction of typographical errors. Thank you for correcting me, though--I feel somewhat sheepishly embarrassed now that I know this is not the "Wilkipedia."

Please be patient with me, as I am still learning the rules here. I am a newcomer--please don't bite me.  :-D

Akmak03 18:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

User and talk page

Thanks for the reverts. Their original comments were way funnier. 20:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Protection

Gwernol, I've semi protected your userpage for 48 hours as it's been getting serious vandalism and I know your busy at the minute. By all means revert the protection, this is just an immediate measure. Sorry if you feel it's inappropriate. Cheers Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Mewtwowimmer's RFA

What will happen to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mewtwowimmer 2? Will it just stay there? I was actually going to oppose him becoming an administrator. Squirepants101 00:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tails0600

This RfA was withdrawn two days ago. I've removed your oppose opinion since once an RfA has been withdrawn it should not be added to. Thanks, Gwernol 01:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

A bcrat must have forgot to close the nomination as fail. — zero » 01:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism to my talk page. It's much appreciated. SteveO 11:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks too :-) Myanw 12:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

RΞDVΞRS ✖ ЯΞVΞЯSΞ awards this Barnstar to Gwernol for sterling good work for Wikipedia in fighting the vandals.

Add me to that list! RΞDVΞRS ✖ ЯΞVΞЯSΞ 15:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Paul Barlow...etc

A number of users have suddenly appeared reverting my edits mechanically user:Henry XXV and user:Kebek Libre I assume that these are socks of the recently blocked User:Stalvione on some sort of revenge mission. User:Paul Barlow : closet homosexual [12] has now appeared. Is there anything that can be done about this? Paul B 17:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandal

I have asked another admin to block this guy, as his sole purpose is messing with things. [13] Wahkeenah 17:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

My Chemical Romance

I have a reference but it would look untidy putting a link beside it. How do I spruce it up?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KinkyCheese (talk • contribs).

John Lennon - Edit

I don't see why you changed the way I edited the John Lennon page.

I changed Murder to - Assassination.

Wikipedia's definition of Assassination is: "Assassination is the murder of a political figure or another important individual"

I feel this is a valid change and see no reason why i am in violation.

Richyhello

I recall some people at the time calling it "assassination". That's borderline, it might be a bit of hyberbole. That term usually refers to killing a politician or activist. Lennon was an activist, and if the CIA had done it, instead of a lunatic fan, the case for "assassination" would be stronger. Wahkeenah 01:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Vincent van Gogh

Great work on quick reverts. It's worth watch listing as it's always getting vandalism. I know you're not short of barnstars, but you deserve another. Tyrenius 01:54, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Great work on Vincent van Gogh just now and generally. Tyrenius 01:54, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Bob freeman1

I don't know if this edit should be called vandalism. The user seemed to have modified their behavior somewhat after the first three messages, so I think some limited good faith should be assumed. —Doug Bell 03:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Uhm...

[14] Meteoroidtest IS Z.E.R.O., fyi. Z.E.R.O. was formerly known as User:Meteoroid. – Chacor 03:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Your revert

Please explain why you have revert my test account's edit? That account was made in order to prevent collateral damage to my edit count. — zero » 03:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for sitting on my userspace with a bazooka! [15], [16], probably more that I've deleted/can't find right now... :) – Riana ^talk 09:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Gwernol, thank you most sincerely for your support in my successful RfA, and for all of your help and advice in the preparation leading up to it. When you are back from Real Life, I hope that I can occasionally at need seek advice from you?--Anthony.bradbury 10:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments on my RfB

Perhaps you have noticed, perhaps you haven't, but I responded to your comments on my RfB. Kind regards. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 15:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey there, is there any reason why you're not responding? Two others have also responded to your comment, I'd really appreciate it if you'd take a look. Thanks. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 17:58, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I responded to the points you brought up. I would really appreciate it if you'd consider your position. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 19:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Please don't just ignore me; if you don't wish to respond please just say so. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 20:58, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

You forget RfA is a discussion. We are meant to discuss it. I am not badgering you, I'm pointing out I have responded to your comments. I don't appreciate you ignoring me. It's necessary because I have explained my reasoning for the things you pointed out. You pulled a lot of things out of context, and I've had to correct you. Thus, you original reasoning is wrong, and now other people are opposing "per" this incorrect reasoning. Also, which supporters have made gross misrepresentations? Majorly _{(o rly?)} 21:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Just trying not to have pornographic images on Wikipedia

I received a couple of notices about my vandalism. I think showing nude pictures of women in bondage doesn't belong here. It's starting to look like a porn site. However, I'll stop since the pictures I deleted are restored. 20:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)~

Your knocking of external links to the Coffeetime Wiki, I didn't think it was an innapropriate link considering the site is dedicated to coffee? If it is inappropriate, I will of course stop wasting my time trying to post it.

I also had a link for the Coffetime Greens club knocked from home roasting...this is a non profit green coffee buying co-operative, run by a group of home roasters...why an earth would this be knocked off?? Surely it's of benefit to those in the UK considering home roasting and looking for a non-commercial source of coffee.

I'm a bit confused.

Daveccoffeetime

Another harasser (sorry to bother you)

This time using the name User:Tijsia, and again on the Talk page of User:Cleo123. You will notice that I am the one who has notified another Admin, User:AuburnPilot, of the User:Xindiweapon harassment. It just seems to go on and on. Bus stop 23:21, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

• Thanks for voting in my RfA. I've decided to withdraw my acceptance because of real WP:CIVIL concerns. I will try again later when I've proven to myself and others that my anger will no longer interfere with my abilities as a Wikipedia editor. Thanks again, and I'll see you around here shortly. :) JuJube 04:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Hay I did not edit anything to day.But my friend did.So do not ban my account for something I did not do.

Hay I did not edit anything to day.But my friend did.So do not ban my account for something I did not do.19:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Dark flame2598Shadow259819:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)19:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)~~

RfA

As you voted Neutral on my last RfA, back in November, on the grounds that I didn't have enough experience (which, in retrospect, you were right about), I decided to ask you for some advice. Do you think I am now ready for a second RfA? I now have over 3700 edits, extensive participation in XfDs and vandal-fighting, and several major article rewrites (including Politics, which is now listed as a GA). You also expressed concerns about the potential POV implications of my username; since then, I have customised my sig to exclude the word "monarchist". (Unfortunately, it is not possible for me to make this an actual username change, as User:Walton is already taken and is not a possible candidate for usurpation.) So would you be prepared to support, if I go to RfA during this month? Walton ^{Vivat Regina!} 19:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

I immediately reedited and signed my warning. Perhaps you missed it. As a [newbie] myself it is always nice to have someone like you to help me learn the ropes. Thanks and happy editing! --Jayron32|talk|contribs 02:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank You Very Much

Gwernol, thanks for your prompt catch and reversion on my "tit torture" page. I have no idea what the guy removed, and it's nice to know I don't have to worry about it. That was my first article. I'm quite proud of it. Your prompt, professional response inspires me to want to learn more about Wikipedia. Thanks again. Matt Nicholson 02:42, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

RfA commentary

Please check the context of your bite example. It may have been slightly overreacting, but it wasn't the first. — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 02:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

If I may add my .02, I believe Rev added the 4im tag because the user had been warned twice before about adding nonsense articles to Wikipedia. Kntrabssi 05:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding RevRagnarok's RfA

Could you please elaborate on my bad faith assumption, because if it came across that way it was entirely unintentional. My new edit may be considered a rant, and so be it, but these thigns have become quite frustrating to me. However, in my initial nomination I don't see anything that could be construed as an assumption of bad faith, unless there is a misunderstanding. Thanks for your time :) Kntrabssi 05:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Gwernol, regarding the bite example you accused Rev of having, it was noted on the user's talk page that he had been warned twice about creating other nonsense articles. Whether or not he vandalized that certain page once or not is moot, he has vandalized Wikipedia as a whole before. Secondly, I relisted Rev because the offending material that got him shot down in the other RfA had been removed, therefore I saw no reason not to give him a second shot. It is true that I believe it was a ridiculous reason to oppose him, however, your assumption that I acted in bad faith is almost assuming bad faith on your part. Hope this clears things up. Take care :) Kntrabssi 23:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

E John Routly

Dan,

Just cross posted the John Routly mini bio from festwiki to main As I aint that good on main wiki can you tittvate article as you see fit Thanks --Keith 09:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

CampsFM

I'm sorry to breach Wikipedia protocol, but since much of Wikipedia seems to be based on observations/opinions that don't necessarily have outside references, I felt that I could add put in my .02.

While I have no problems with my Scientology opinions being deleted, where does it stop?

I'm adding some "Personal Analysis" to the article about "Married... With Children," because it seems relevant to the article, particularly the return of a former executive producer who seemed to turn the show around in its waning years. I have no references for the change in quality, besides the change in executive producers and the observations of myself and my friends and family who were fans of the show.

I apologize in advance if this violates the Neutral POV Policy, but I could point out a number of articles that are not neutral (or factually incorrect) in what they say that have been around a lot longer than any article I've edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Campsfm (talk • contribs)

I'm sorry, but I'll have to ask for you to pardon my ignorance on "signing" a statement.

As far as the Married... With Children stuff went, frankly, I'm a bit annoyed that you deleted my additions out of hand. There wasn't much of an opinion involved, and, the personnel names were taken not from IMDB, but from the videotapes that I recorded back in the day. Ron Leavit, Ellen L. Fogle, Arthur Silver, Katherine Green and Michael G. Moye are names who I see on my television set while watching the show, and Seven is a character that I saw and was referrred to in the original article, without any references whatsoever. How am I supposed to "Cite" a private VHS recording?

If you're one of those people who don't want other people to contribute to Wikipedia, or if you don't want me to contribute to Wikipedia specifically, just let me know and I'll stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Campsfm (talk • contribs)

• if you want to sign your name and add a date, just put ~~~~ on the end of your message and your username will automatically get tagged on. Like this --> Alison^☺ 16:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

edit war

Regarding your warning here, please keep in mind that Rockpocket was reverting edits made by a banned user (by self-admission). I'm not familiar with all the relevant policies, but this might change things a bit. ---Sluzzelin talk 02:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes indeed. The comments I am reverting are from the indef blocked and banned user Light current (talk · contribs) under the policy WP:BAN. I'm therefore removing your "warning" as it is neither appropriate nor relevant. Thanks. Rockpocket 04:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

ASL

hello, can i ask why you deleted my ASL modification? anyone who knows the game will agree that it is arguably the most detailed wargame ever designed, which the article itself makes clear. --Jewish-wargamer

Hi, thanks, got your message. I noticed that nothing else is footnoted in the article, so I assumed that no other additions would need to be footnoted. Most people agree that it is the most complicated and detailed wargame ever designed for commercial use (non-professional wargame) so I would suggest that noting that actually is encyclopedic. Ill see if I can find a source though. Jewish-wargamer 13:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Arpacktu

hey i dont feel my deletion of the article came with sufficient warning. im just trying to write my first real proper article and u delete it and i got angry. not my fault ur busy ruing peoples articles (every complaint iver ead on this discussion page seems to have an excsue justifying their articles existence and i think i should probably get one aswell). so yeah can i make my article and keep it there long enough for it to be improved? because i dont have too much spare time in one sitting so ur ruing any chance i have at makign this thing. i jsut want to get the word out about this rare cryptid.

exodustheoryExodustheory

• Why not create the article in your own userspace/sandbox then try to mainspace it only if and when it's good enough? (And when it's got proper cites, etc!!) - Alison^☺ 11:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

hi

hi Gwernol, The Golan heights are part of Syria according to UNO, then , can you explain to me, why do not you include the area into Syrian area?? I am waiting for your answer---83.156.243.238 15:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

thanks

thank you for your quick response. I have invited discussion on the talk page of Syria.I could not find any previous discussion on it. Does Israeli area include the areas occupied in 1967? (they are not recognized as Israeli land by the UNO)I ask this just for information? I also find that disputed area of Kashmir in not included in Pakistan although it is under Pakistani control. Is'nt this discrimination?--83.156.243.238 15:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet account of shadow2598

You don't remember banning shadow2598,well you did.And doing so you stopped me from editing stuff when I did nothing wrong.I'm not mad but I don't think it's fair to ban me when I did nothing wrong. Dark flame2598 02:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Achristl

is vandalising despite warnings. please help. Carlossuarez46 02:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

User talk:86.152.83.236

Thanks for the quick work there. --Guinnog 13:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Such a pleasure to see you back! I'll still only be sporadic here for the next while, though I have had a fun day on it today. Happy editing! --Guinnog 13:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet account of shadow2598

Well you might not have banned me but someone did.Oh ya,I at least have 10 puppets as you call them.And my puppet numbers are still growing.Now I know it's not bad to have sock puppets.So I'll have as many as I want. shadow2598,Dark flame2598,Dark knight2598,flaming sun2598And many more Shadow2598 15:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

User page vandalism

Hi Gwernol. I appreciate your vigilance about vandalism to my user page (though personally I don't mind if anonymous strays pee on it). But will you take a look at the protected box? The wording makes it look like I'm the vandal. Thanks again.--G-Dett 19:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Gwernol! (Don't be embarrassed – who cares.)--G-Dett 19:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Links

Exactly! "Tedesco" is not "German", because it is not comprised of the letters G-E-R-M-A-N, per WP:MOS and the edit history of German -- Hrödberäht (gespräch) 21:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Yet more from User:Shadow2598

About 2 weeks ago someone banned me then took the ban off.And now I can do this.But how do you know if it is my sock puppet,I only mentioned a few of them to you.You just can't go banning people on hunches.And the ones I showed you except 1 were about shadows.I will start getting creative on names and stop using 2598 after them. Shadow2598 21:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Public Service has Backfired

Gwernol, when I wrote the Wiki article on "Tit Torture" back on March 3. 2007, I did so because I wanted to do something for the public interest without any recompense. Unfortunately, I am in the process of learning I may have slit my own throat by doing so. You see, my website is a for-profit site with adult themes based on the same topic. When the Wiki article was spidered by Google and added as the #1 link for a particular set of important keyphrases, my site dissapeared for those same phrases. Research since then is indicating it is either the Wiki article itself, or the links to articles in my site from that article, that may have cause my site's demise. In short, I may be paying for my generosity with my livelihood.

I'm still looking into it, but if that turns out to be the case, and it's simply links, I'll just remove those. If it's the article itself, however, can it be removed, if not, would you gig me for changing it significantly? Honestly, I'd rather not be airing my laundry here, but it's the only way I could contact you. Thanks. Matt Nicholson 00:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

PLEASE LEAVE THE STEPHEN COLBERT PAGE THAT WAY FOR THE NIGHT. IT IS ALL FOR FUN AND FOR THE SHOW> IT IS NOT VANDALISM OR WITH ANY ILL-WILL. IT IS STRICTLY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE COLBERT REPORT TV SHOW AND WILL BE CHANGED AS SOON AS THE PAGE IS USED FOR COMEDIC PURPOSES FOR THE SHOW. PLEASE! tela42499

Follow-up on Public Service...

Gwernol, thanks for the very quick reply. I tend to have problems with the concept that this article is the cause of my problems, but I have a couple of search engine experts looking closely at it. I would have thought the "nofollow" command would be important, but it's being looked at. The problems also coincide with a major Google algorithm change, which was all our first thoughts, but we've been unable to find anything there.

I'm hoping the Wiki thing is just a scare. I'm proud of the article and would much rather not even consider doing anything with it. However, just to make sure I understand -- even though I wrote it, I lost control over it once I published it -- at least any additional control as writer as opposed to any other approved editor? This whole fiasco has me tearing my hair out. Matt Nicholson 00:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry that the caps was on. I hate caps and usually don't use them. I usually have the caps lock key disabled, but I just installed Vista and that hasn't been fixed yet, so I did not mean to appear to be shouting. I work for the show and was making these changes for a reason. I was going to change them back as soon as we were through. I am very aware of the seriousness of the Wiki. I am a staff member of expressobeans.com and have been using the Wiki for some time. I do not appreciate the tone that was taken in your second message. I had changed the article the second time before I realized that you had messaged me in the first place. I realize that you probably deal with some frustrating prople on the site, but maybe you should change your tone so it doesn't appear that you are shouting. I am sorry that I upset you so much. but I am not some internet hacking idiot that wants to make your job any more frustrating than it is, and I'm sorry that I did. I don't know if you know this, but Stephen Colbert often tells his audience to change the Wiki for his personal entertainment all the time, which I am sure is a huge headache for you, too. The internet in a community, just like the real world, and we should treat each other as such. tela42499

username

hi - just came across this username which I thought you should know about. cheers!Tvoz |talk 05:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

• I just indefblocked it for WP:U and vandalism only - Alison^☺ 05:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

RfA

I also blanked Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jim Douglas as well after you removed User:Jim Douglas from RfA. Amos Han ^Talk 23:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry!

I left for a sec to get something to eat and my sister started doing random vandalization. Doody 09 05:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Well done

But i've been vigilant too. Cheers, RCS 07:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for your help with user Brf00. He's apparently got an axe to grind about the subject of flag-burning. He also seems to lack a sense of humour. The "you gone" line is taken from a baseball announcer who's in the habit of saying "He gone!" when an opposing batter strikes out. Wahkeenah 13:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Fatima Whitbread

Sorry, I know I should've made a reference regarding the information I added (which is completely true, if you thought otherwise), but how on Earth is it 'controversial biographical information concerning living persons'? That's baffling!

81.110.77.105

Natl1's RFA Question

I have answered your question on my RFA. Feel free to ask any follow-up question.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 17:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I warned him

[17]. RCS 17:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Cheers Gwernol

For your RFAr statement. – Steel 18:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

white

hello gwernol. i looked over the edit that i made, and i am perplexed. i have no idea how i would have inadvertently vandalized 'white.' i have nothing against white. in fact, i am white. my toothbrush is white, and so is my guinea pig. thanks for catching it and letting me know. :-] the_undertow ^talk 19:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

cool. we're all good and i'll blame it on windows vista. i blame everything on windows vista. the_undertow ^talk 00:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

"Inappropriate warnings"

I had always been told not to delete warnings on my talk page, regardless. Since then, I have always let them stand even if they were not appropriate, unless they were vulgar or insulting. If I was wrong to restore that warning, I apologize. Rhindle The Red 00:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

And I'm apologizing again for putting the previous on the wrong page. I must be tired... Rhindle The Red 01:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For the talk page reverts. Peace, -- The Hybrid 03:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

University/School sites

Gwernol, I have a question. I am well aware that many anon IP sites are educational establishments, and have not failed to read the yellow template box notifying me of this fact. But, when chasing down vandals from these sites, it has become apparent to me that these sites do not produce any sensible edits. None. Not any. Nichts. Niemals. Rien. Therefore, given that a block does not prevent any editor from coming to us in read-only mode, why the hesitation about vigorous blocking? Am I missing something?--Anthony.bradbury 12:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

User:69.74.82.146 and schoolblock

I've asked repeatedly for 69.74.82.146 to be permanently schoolblocked, but although the template is on the user talk page User_talk:69.74.82.146, students are still successfully making anonymous edits.

Please, make the schoolblock actually work, and leave it on. (This is on your talk page, since you were the last admin to "renew" the schoolblock.) Thanks, 69.74.82.146 20:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Another sock

First, thanks for the help in dealing with the disruptive editing from Toa Mario (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). In case you didn't see it, he appears to have tried the same tactics with Hoov edd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I've blocked that account, reverted the changes and added the templates. Slambo (Speak) 20:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Block of 69.114.148.28

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for blocking User:69.114.148.28. This user has vandalized my user page twice and talk page once and the vandalism that User:69.114.148.28 did was very likely personal attacks that hurt my feelings. Amos Han Talk 21:22, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Deal Or No DealEdit

Sorry :( my mistake, i didn't realise you reverted it, i thought that you were vandalising it! Sorry Thenthornthing 11:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Formerly/formally

You're quite right - I haven't got my brain in gear today ;-)  – Tivedshambo (talk) 11:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

At the page Jennifer Lynn there have been several changes which I think are vandalism by a particular user. There was a AfD put in by 86.2.99.78 and the page was redirected by user Alomiakoda. I am a representative for the actress and have reason to belive that Alomiakoda uses the IP address 86.2.99.78 and that the username relates to a person who has a personal vendetta against the actress. I was wondering if there was any action that could be taken to prevent this in future and to warn the user of their misconduct. 82.34.254.89 13:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I.P x 2 = possible vandal?

Hello, i have heard that you can track down I.P adresses and i just wondered if User:soopahoops77 and User:Relentless1234567 share thre same I.P adress. Is it 'legal' on wikipedia to have 2 accounts?
Sorry, thankyou, kind regards, Zesty Prospect 15:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)