User talk:Luna Santin

Talk – Sandbox – Blog

Welcome to my talk page! I'll sometimes reply on your talk, but will frequently (increasingly often) reply here.

When leaving messages, please remember these easy steps:

• Use a ==descriptive heading==

• Use [[wikilinks]] when mentioning users and pages

• Sign your post with four tildes ~~~~ to leave your name and date

If you're new to Wikipedia, please see Welcome to Wikipedia or frequently asked questions.

Click here to leave me a message

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28.

Inproper signature

Hi Luna Santin, thank you for fixing my signature.(Back in January, on Daniel's RfA, when my username at that time was User:Wikipedier) Please accept my apologies for the error.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 05:11, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to be of any service. Thanks for taking a moment of your time. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smile

This template must be substituted, see Template:Smile for instructions NHRHS2010^Talk 21:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) – Luna Santin (talk) 01:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

semi-protection on User:Jack Merridew

Thanks for locking-down my user page. Given the attention it has been receiving I think it best to leave it this way for a while. Unfortunately, I expect that this will move things back to the talk page. I'm most impressed with the speed that defenders have shown. From my point of view, this is a great way to meet new people. Hi! --Jack Merridew 08:42, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, glad to be of service. :) Haven't checked, yet, but if they stop by again, feel free to let me know. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

just a taste.

hey honey i have a question. how do you put images on wikipedia?--Savetheeggs 19:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a taste? Honey? o.o Ah, anyway, you may want to have a look at WP:TUTORIAL and/or WP:IMAGE for help. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks sugs.--Savetheeggs 03:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:O

zomg – Gurch 21:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lies! – Luna Santin (talk) 21:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the vandal watching

I'm glad to see you're still fighting the good fight. Doggone, I'm back under a new username after promising myself I wouldn't do NPP, especially after requesting de-adminship. Yet that's what I'm doing. I must be nuts. I'm glad to say that I have done some real editing, so perhaps I'm not a totally lost cause. :) See you 'round. The former Lucky 6.9 via PMDrive1061 01:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I'd been wondering where you got off to. It's good to see you! Looks like neither of us is quiiite as active as we used to be, but it's tough to ever really quit, I think. ;) Will look forward to seeing you around, definitely. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Great to see you as well. There are a couple of users whom I suspect are Daniel Brandt meatpuppets who basically tried to drive me into the dirt. One hasn't edited in a long time and the other still does with a few idiosyncratic edits here and there. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but these guys really are out to get the admins. Scary. Anyway, I'm trying to give CPR to the nearly abandoned Radio Control Wiki and it's drawn a couple of new users. I guess R/C fans don't write wikis...except for maybe yours truly. Keep on keepin' on. Take care. --PMDrive1061 01:58, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smile and my 10K edit

NHRHS2010 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I just made my 10,000th edit today, according to My Preferences. That number includes deleted edits as well. This is my 10,008th edit. NHRHS2010 talk 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 43	22 October 2007	About the Signpost

Fundraiser opens, budget released	Biographies of living people grow into "status symbol"
WikiWorld comic: "George Stroumboulopoulos"	News and notes: Wikipedian Robert Braunwart dies
WikiProject Report: League of Copyeditors	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tapas

have you seen the Petit Bateau article. I think its just fabulous. swell job wikipedia, i myself quite fancy Petit Bateau. I do feel that it could be expanded.

On another note my dear, would you like to join me at Jose Lucias Caliamente's Espanol Resturante? They have some swell Catalan delicasies and I would just love you to join me. Maybe we could chortle while sipping our cava. Get back to me gorgeous. --Chunckymonkey 18:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 44	29 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Florence Devouard interview
Page creation for unregistered users likely to be reenabled	WikiWorld comic: "Human billboard"
News and notes: Treasurer search, fundraiser, milestones	WikiProject Report: Agriculture
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Thanks!

Thanks for reverting my talk page. I really appreciate that! Au revoir and happy editing! Icestorm815 04:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to be of any service. See you around the wiki. – Luna Santin (talk) 04:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ralph Nader

I have no idea what point you might have been trying to make on talk:Ralph Nader. Here is what the reference says "Nader's presence on the ballot proved crucial". Can you get more clear than that? It goes on to say, "in at least two states". However I suspect the writer didn't take the time to check the results for all 50 states, as there are no other states other than those two, which you can confirm from the other reference. The same reference goes on to say "John Pearce, a California activist who launched a Web site called RalphDontRun.net, said that even if Nader's numbers for the 2000 election were correct, he still tipped Florida and New Hampshire to Bush. If Gore had won either state, he would have won the election." 199.125.109.32 05:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page is protected to prevent edit warring; it would do little good to continue the edit war through administrators. Instead, I encourage you to make use of Wikipedia's dispute resolution process to establish consensus among your fellow editors regarding the most appropriate article version. If you feel that such a consensus has been reached, then feel free to submit another {{editprotected}} request. Beyond that, I'm acting as an administrator in this matter, and because of that, it wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment on the merit or lack of merit of any particular contributor's opinion. I can advise or perhaps decide on policy matters, but that's about my limit. Hope that makes sense. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, mixed up pages I'd replied to, recently. In short, it seemed to me that a lot of people were expressing their own personal opinions -- all politeness aside, I'm sure everybody's opinion is great, but that's not what we're here for. See WP:V for more information. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Review request for block

Hi Luna--would you take a peek at this conversation and let me know whether I'm handling this correctly? I'm trying to play it by the book, but I understand the concerns being raised here. Dppowell 06:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By my understanding, the primary reason for the "user is active now" instruction is that we prefer to assume good faith, either figuring that a given anon IP address may be a different person, from week to week, or that a new user was just trying things out, and will hopefully come around to contributing productively in the future. With accounts, some of those possibilities are moot -- exceptional situations aside, we can generally assume that one account will be used by the same person, from one day to the next; this allows us to build a more complete picture of an individual's behavior, and to take that information into account. If a particular account is repeatedly causing problems, especially after having been given several chances to improve, we at some point need to consider shifting from a tone of "you're new, it's cool, let us help you out," to something more like, "please shape up or leave." Weighing the pros and cons, do we gain or lose more by asking this user to stay or go? I only took a quick glance at their contributions, I see some edits that look helpful at first glance, but also some odd sprees of vandalism. Block log is empty, talk page sports a few final warnings. No obvious sign of strong administrative response, whether by blocks in the short or long term, or in some try at a conversation with the user. Looks like some admin action is in order; the particular form of that action might depend on how patient we figure we can afford to be, with this person. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, maybe a 24-hour (or shorter) block? Given the editing pattern, they might not even be back before the block expires, but they'd see the block notice on their page and maybe get the message? Dppowell 06:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Might be worth a shot, yeah. :) Just brainstorming, if you check your email frequently, you could also give a longer block but make it clear you'd consider unblocking after having a talk with the user. Comes to mind since, as you said, they may not even come around inside the duration of the 24 hours or so the first block might last. So... probably that or a short block plus checking in at a later date, whatever feels most appropriate to you. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This admin business is trickier than it looks. :-) Thanks! Dppowell 06:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you do well, I hear they double your salary. :) Hope that works out well. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IRC

How come I never see ya there Luna? I miss the chats. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

/me pours a glass of rum over Luna :P

Blargh, I have a new mistress, and she is harsh with my time. :'( Hoping things will settle down by next semester, though. With luck, these setbacks are temporary. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

She stole your first love, shame. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't tell Shanel! – Luna Santin (talk) 07:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tsk, tsk, and she just stopped by me talk page too. You'll have to bribe me for that one bud. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like another one bites the dust... unless you want a trip in my time machine, plus tickets to the next Queen concert? – Luna Santin (talk) 07:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I'd settle for a shot of tequila on the rocks.... KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:18, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It may be a bit watered down, by the time it reaches you, but I'll have my people send it to your people. – Luna Santin (talk) 07:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But I don't have any people! :O KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, nobody has people. -- lucasbfr ^talk 10:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is the most connected of them all. After Lucas, of course. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Remembrance...

--nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 01:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trolling

I am trolling your talk page. :o --CableModem^^ 01:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for the assistance with the IP vandal who consistently vandalized Kappa Alpha Order. After warnings were issued, he continued to vandalize, and you had blocked him. Thank you. Maser ^(Talk!) 07:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. :) Glad to be of service. Thanks for your efforts, as well. – Luna Santin (talk) 07:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All in a days work! MASER FLETCHER, AWAY!!! Maser ^(Talk!) 20:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is fudging rediculous

In the article, Wherever You Are (movie), it has been vandalized for two days now and no one has edited it. This prooves what a disgrace Wikipedia is boo.--Savetheeggs 22:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]