User talk:Jéské Couriano/Archive 3

• NOTE: If you leave a message for me here, I will respond to it here.
• NOTE: Given that the Mudkip meme madness still leaves a bad taste in my mouth because of the constant trolling on the former talk page and the anonymous threat on me, I will be suspicious of posts regarding "mudkipz" [sic] or the events that took place on Talk:Mudkip. Understand that I have {{User:Jéské Couriano/UBX/Mudkipz}} on the user page for a reason. However, if you are here regarding information on the meme as it has happened on-wiki, I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.
• NOTE: If you need to ask me a question regarding certain users, be aware that I will look into the history.

Talk Page

Eh, my bad. I meant to move it back chronlogically. Didn't look like it would delete content otherwise I would've moved it manually. Sorry about that mess up. -WarthogDemon 01:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be moved to the bottom? -WarthogDemon 01:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Erm, it was until someone moved it back up to teh top. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 01:26, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's my mistake: [1]. Looking at it like that it looked like the only change the actual move itself, without any stuff added. Should've double checked myself. Again, sorry about that. -WarthogDemon 01:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Nolle perspiration. His comment's back in, and I moved it back to the bottom (in keeping with the chronology). -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 01:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Regardless, the user seems to insist on having it at the top... -WarthogDemon 01:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

That strikes me as very odd, given that he's been around for at least a year and he suddenly jumps into this issue (although his edit to the actual section was honest). -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 01:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

My MfD page

I tried that (in fact, it still says that) but it is not showing up on CAT:CSD because it wants some deletion rationale (since it is a talk page) so I did this instead. MfD - Rjd0060 23:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I've given my opinion on the matter at the MfD. The Speedy tag should have been honored. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 23:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Homeopathy - request for protected "under dispute"

thanks

it is important though to tagg the article under dipsute Bold textwhich can not be removed by the editors if no consensus is reached. thanks again. --Sm565 16:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Your Message

I received a message from you regarding vandalism. If you have anything valid to say to me regarding the accusation, I want to do so through arbitration. 65.188.22.40 23:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Good luck. You have no case for arbitration. And while we're at it, stop trolling. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 00:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

RE: Usernames

Oops! WP:RFAA told me to go there for "some other reason" and that's why I did that. Sorry!!! jonathan (talk — contribs) 01:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Replied at your talk page. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 01:17, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

What does your reply mean? jonathan (talk — contribs) 01:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Replied again; read the Wiktionary links. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 01:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

SkiersBot find

Thanks for the 'heads up' on this. For some bizarre reason the Category:Fictional universe stubs‎ was included in the recursive list (a 'daughter' of) the Category:Comics stubs. As there was only one subcategory therein that could be strictly considered as a 'comics' related fictional universe, I have removed the link and the fict universe stubs won't be included in lists of comics stubs any more. Sometimes it's these 'goofs' that help fix things that aren't looked at too often (I would never have thought that fict universes would be considered as 'comics' by someone)! I'll go back on the bot tags and remove any that clearly fall into those other fict universes categories. SkierRMH 19:54, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Null perspiration, chummer. I'll go talk with rspeer; he blocked SkiersBot until you were able to address it. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 20:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

It's unblocked now. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 21:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Good. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 21:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Axolotl

Hi there. I see you've been pretty active in removing Mudkip related nonsense from the Pokemon and mudskipper articles, so wonder if you'd mind watching Axolotl as well. It gets the same rubbish periodically, not helped by a page on Encyclopaedia Dramatica encouraging people to revert to a version full of silliness. I can't link to the Encyclopaedia Dramatica page as it's on the spam blacklist - suggest you Google it and go to the mudkip page if you haven't seen it already. I'm watching it myself, but will be away for the next week so would be good to have another pair of eyes on it. Regards Iain99^{Balderdash and piffle} 14:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you muchly. I'll watchlist it and talk with User:Alison if things get out of hand over there. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 18:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

u

Editing

Every correction I made was formatting errors, or spelling. If you look at the reversion you reverted it back to, it looks ridiculous. I don't care who's edits they are. Spelling was wrong, and headers weren't capitalized. You asked for me not to correct other users edits? Who's would I correct then? Carter | Talk to me 05:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Your own. Other editors take offense if someone edits the comments they made, even for grammar, spelling, and capitalization. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 05:33, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I apologize then. I have a script that runs letting me know of misspelling. I thought it wouldn't be a problem, but if correcting other users spelling is offensive, I wouldn't want to hurt anyones feelings. I removed the silly in my first statement as well. Sorry about that. It was rude. Is it not ok then to correct other users spelling? Carter | Talk to me 05:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

It isn't OK to do so. The only time you could get away with editing another user's comment is if they're making legal threats, personal attacks, or trying to out someone, and then you remove the offending sections (or the whole post if it's just one big ol LT/PA/outing). -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 05:57, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

You say to get away with like it's against WP policy to correct simple spelling errors. I can get away with it I feel as long as it is simple correction, but once again, I DO NOT want to be offensive. It's not against policy however to minor correct as I did. Anyways, I consider the matter closed. I will refrain from editing other users comments on talk pages. Thanks for the heads up. Carter | Talk to me 06:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Null perspiration, chummer. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 06:02, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with that expression? What does it mean? Forgive my being naive. Also, considering your edit history, I highly support your RfA. Carter | Talk to me 06:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

(Translation from shadowspeak) No sweat, buddy. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 06:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Your RFA

Given you're passing with flying colours so far, I can probably guess what your first admin action is when promoted (delete the Main Page! Yeah!) Will ^(talk) 12:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Har har har. You're a regular Bill Engvall. Actually, I'm planning to beeline straight for RfPP and AN/I. I don't plan to delete any Main Pages ever. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 17:46, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Now that's awesome. And I really mean LOP (241-260), which comes off semi on the 17th. Will ^(talk) 18:46, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

My RfA finishes a few hours before the prot does, IIRC. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 18:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Looking forward to you being an admin! Thanks for your advice and suggestions yesterday! Congrats again! Carter | Talk to me 05:44, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Um, isn't there a WP:COUNTINGCHICKENS? No? :P -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 07:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Ha ha ha now you're just being modest. Well, good luck anyways! Carter | Talk to me 07:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

­*waits for you to pounce on the LOP in 80 minutes* Will ^(talk) 14:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Not nagging at the same time (well, a bit...), but the 4channers are quiet for a day when it's off protection... Will ^(talk) 20:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

If they start acting up, I'll protect it. So far it's quiet on the Western Front. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 20:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

RE:Jack Thompson

Sorry I just noticed your comment on the request for protection, and realized I wasn't terribly clear on what I meant. But the correct page got protected so its all good, sorry for any confusion, Ill try and be more clear next time.  :-) Good luck editing.
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 06:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Null perspiration, chummer. I reverted myself after I realized you wanted the disambiguation page protected. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 06:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I Aim To Please

And to help Wikipedia of course. :D Now what should be done with User:UniversalHero? -WarthogDemon 06:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted two of his edits so far and informed FisherQueen. I was planning to go to AN/I if I didn't get a response from her within the next three hours. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 06:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

As have I. He's reverted all of hours. I gave him an only warning just to be official. -WarthogDemon 06:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm about to take him to WP:AN3 for Vampirella. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 06:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually he just got blocked as a sock of a User:Creepy Crawler. -WarthogDemon 06:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I just saw that. I'll help you counteract what he's done. Nevermind; already been taken care of. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 06:19, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes indeed. That was some weird foot fetish vandal . . . only slightly odder than a coprophagic IP vandal I dealt with 2 months ago... :P Happy editing! -WarthogDemon 06:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Can we trade? ;) I'm tired of SIHULM vandals and BSR IPs. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 06:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

BSR IPs? Biologically-Sane Rhinos? Borderline Smelly Rats? Bloody Salty Republicans? Barnacle-Sporting Rabbits? -WarthogDemon 06:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Bad Seed at Rotom. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 06:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes. Forgot about reverting him from your page sometime back. Ah well I must be off for now. Cheers. :) -WarthogDemon 06:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Creepy Crawler

Regards this edit and comment, that particular user is a sock of User:Creepy Crawler who's actions usually consist solely of adding a link to the barefoot page and a collection of middling-useful categories; sometimes correct, sometimes spammy. I've been watching and correcting his/her additions for a while now, but it's a lot of work to revert and the 3rr is always close to being breached when he/she is actually online. All this to say, if you see similar actions in the future, I love to have help with corrections, warnings and blocks (I believe you will pass an RFA soon?) and this has been going on for months. I think myself alone I've tagged about 8 different socks with exactly the same contribution history.

Thanks,

WLU 14:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out and I'll watchlist both barefoot and the pages he was hitting as UniversalHero. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 18:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I've never noticed him/her editing barefoot directly, is there a way of spotting new links to Barefoot? I've tried using the related changes page, but either I'm mis-timing it, using it wrong, or it's just impossible. WLU 18:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Go to barefoot and click on "What links here." That gives a list of every article linking to it. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 18:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Tried that, there's over 550 pages and it's a lot to click/crtl-f/edit. Are they arranged chronologically? I've never tried to figure out if there's an order to the list. Would just going to the bottom of the list give the newest? WLU 19:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't know; from what I've seen, it's random. However, I would see if these appear on the list (these were the ones he last hit) and check them to see if they're legit. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 19:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Anti vandalism thank you

Thank you for quickly reverting vandal-like deletion edits to my talk page by Dictator Bimbo Wales this morning. Jaraalbe 19:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Null perspiration, chummer. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 19:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA - attention, pls

Hi Jeske, just want to alert you that there has been an Oppose vote at your RfA, citing an WP:Civil issue. I already added my comment to this, but I guess you would want to add a statement of your own, to. The issue is a bit, hmm, creepy... :-/ Gray62 13:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you muchly for telling me, but I keep my RfA watchlisted so I can respond to any questions or criticisms. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 18:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Revert explained

Just a note to explain why I reverted your well intentioned revert of personal attacks as found on User talk:Philippe. This is a very unique case were the personal attacks are actually the subject matter of the main topic, so reverting them has a negative impact on the topic itself. My assumption is that you acted solely based on normal Wikipedia standards and did not have any hidden agenda of protecting the one making the personal attacks. That individual has now been blocked for 48 hours. Just wanted you to know exactly what was going on and why I reverted your revert. There is no need to reply as this was a very unique situation. Thank you for your on going work in reverting vandalism where ever it occurs. Dbiel ^(Talk) 19:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA was successful

Congratulations, I have closed your RfA as successful and you are now a sysop! If you have any questions about adminship, feel free to ask me. Please consider messaging me on IRC for access to the #wikipedia-en-admins channel. Good luck! --Deskana (talk) 11:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Congrats from me too! I don't think we've ever interacted, but I just saw your intervention today on the Flavius sockpuppetry issue. I'll immediately press-gang you into service as a sock fighter! (You can earn the Whack-a-mole Stuffed Tiger Prize too!) :-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Congratulationes! Oh I forgot, you're not Spanish! :-) Bearian 12:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, congrats, I see you're getting your hands dirty at RFPP already! All the best :) ~ Riana ⁂ 19:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations on your successful RfA. If you have any questions, then you can also ask me. I'm not an admin here, but I am on another Wiki. So I am familiar with the tools. But finally: no more having to go to WP:RFPP; you can do it yourself! Ksy92003(talk) 13:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Steve Hoffman article protection

You protected this article with the "Controversy" section removed, despite it having credible citations. Please revert the article back to include this information and then protect it. Thanks. Sidar 20:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

See meta:The wrong version. I will not get involved in an edit war. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 20:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Please restore the previous version of the Steve Hoffman entry. The Controversy section should be included before being protected. It it both well-sourced and a key detail in this individual's career. Otherwise, I request that this entry is removed entirely. The people that are removing the Controversy section are trying to erase a key detail which makes for a very biased Wiki entry. Huberman 20:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Huberman

I will not take part in an edit war - the Controversy section's the one being warred over. Reach a consensus on the talk page, all of you. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 20:48, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I have added my opinion on this matter to the Talk section of the Steve Hoffman entry. I respectfully ask that you consider the details Jéské. Thanks12.152.10.41 21:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Huberman