Jump to content

User talk:Luna Santin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Buickid (talk | contribs) at 10:11, 30 November 2007 (→‎Your Wikipedia: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


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
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
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]
You forgot him – Gurch 08:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Terribly sorry, sir. :( I'll be passing somebody who knows how to get in touch with him, on the streets, tomorrow, so I'll make things right, then. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I never got that shot. :p KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's in the mail, and the mail always goes through. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Remembrance...

Rememberance Day


--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]

(1) {{sofixit}}. (2) Articles which remain vandalized probably aren't being read very often. – Luna Santin (talk) 07:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pecking order?

User Calton, diffs

14:42, 8 November 2007 (hist) (diff) User talk:66.35.123.205‎ (Nope: this is an IP address, not a user account, so you don't have the same "rights". Maybe you ought to sign into your real account.)

CausticX 18:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the comment has already been removed by Isarig. – Luna Santin (talk) 00:36, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering if it's true. Seems this user Calton is pretty active. Do IP addresses not have the same rights on Wikipedia? Is it okay to be uncivil, under certain circumstances? Seems like this guy is and it's okay. Thanks, CausticX 22:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strictly speaking, the only rights anyone has on Wikipedia are the right to leave and the right to fork. That said, I strongly prefer that we treat all users as fairly and equally as possible. It appears there's some history here, that I'm no aware of -- without being aware of that history, it's difficult to offer insightful comments. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the input, CausticX 01:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

c'mon man...

Don't be a spoil sport! Vandalising is what makes Wikipedia fun! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billyjimbo78 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Luan santin your are not the owern of wikipedia.org.en

some els is you can not block me my reason is that i had to copy Info on George burns for a paper and not typ it


thank you aiden thieriot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jake0111 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*ahem*

The previous message was a test. Please ignore it. And this one -- 144.32.58.192 20:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was kinda wondering. :p You beat me to that revert on Uranium, though, nice work. – Luna Santin (talk) 20:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe... and that was despite having to solve a captcha before the edit would save! (the bane of anonymous editing, for sure) – Gurch 21:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My "fans"

Thanks for the offer, but I like to have a history of such vandalism in case there is a pattern that I can report. Have a great day! Ward3001 23:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding User:EpicFlame

Hey there, I responded to the recent concerns on this user's talkpage. I did quite pointedly ask the user not to recreate his douchebox userbox, but he went and did so anyway. Like I said on EF's talk page, I do apologize if it seemed a bit hasty, and the block can reduced to a definite limit, but I stand by my judgment that the user was doing more harm than good. GlassCobra 01:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 45 5 November 2007 About the Signpost
Wikimedia avoids liability in French lawsuit WikiWorld comic: "Fall Out Boy"
News and notes: Grant money, fundraiser, milestones WikiProject Report: Lists of basic topics
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Volume 3, Issue 46 12 November 2007 About the Signpost
Unregistered page creation remains on hold so far WikiWorld comic: "Exploding whale"
News and notes: Fundraiser, elections galore, milestones Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Missing encyclopedic articles 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 07:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ACW

You told her you were 'concerned' about a personal attack (WP:NPA) in an article (WP:VAND)...? I'm sorry, no, I want an explanation for why that doesnt result in an immediate block. Jose João 10:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain how there could be two sides to this. In what situation do the actions of one editor justify attacking the other editor in an article? I'm trying to think of a situation but I'm finding it pretty difficult. I'm finding it pretty difficult to understand why she hasnt been banned for stalking me. Notice the page history of Angolan Civil War, Neal Blair, History of Angola, Rhodesia, et cetera, et cetera. Jose João 10:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's a work in progress. This is the first time I've run into either of you, so I'm going to spend a few minutes looking into things. Please be patient. – Luna Santin (talk) 10:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Humor

well i was surfing around on wikipedia, and came across this..

i was looking for Acura RSX...

while there, something caught my attention..the first line that the page reads is-

"DRIVEN BY HOMOSEXUALS LIKE MAAACY SMITH"... funny..yes...accurate...maybe...hurting...yes...


i tried editing it by logging in..but as soon as i log in, it disappears..i mean just that line disappears.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tutusinghsohi (talk • contribs) 18:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re : Unblock

And for some reason it works... :o) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 22:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Block evasion!
And, of course. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 22:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My error - I meant to block User:Mattjblythe who has since been blocked by others for uploading a misleading obscene picture and replacing an article with it. Mailer Diablo had merely redirected another article to correctly point to this vandalized article. My apologies. - DavidWBrooks 01:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Willywonka2008

Why would you possibly unblock this obvious vandal? Corvus cornix (talk) 04:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As was pointed out by a good-faith user, they haven't vandalized since their last warning. A vandal likely won't check back to see if they've been unblocked. If they keep at it, they're easy enough to reblock. Mostly, though, because it was a reasonable request from a longtime user. – Luna Santin (talk) 05:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They're obviously a returning vandal, but if you want to take the chance, have fun. Probably User:Gsabogal. Corvus cornix (talk) 05:46, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A brief message from user 71.239.133.107

Thanks for not attacking me. 71.239.133.107 (talk) 08:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes very admirable of you Luna. :P KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You betcha. Assume good faith and all. – Luna Santin (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is "I solemnly swear I am up to no good"[1] an expression of bad faith?   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 07:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's a bit odd, but probably not bad in and of itself. It's also a line from the Harry Potter series (especially coupled with "mischief managed," in the same diff, the reference is pretty solid). Anything else going on, besides that? – Luna Santin (talk) 07:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, sorry I didn't see the connection to Harry Potter.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 09:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I thank you again, Luna Santin, for not engaging in petty fault-finding. I only made the Harry Potter reference as a way of making light of that entire dispute (if that's what it can be called). If it's bothersome to other users, I will happily blank the entire page, because I acknowledge that a User Talk page for an unregistered user doesn't provide any real value. Just let me know...71.239.133.107 (talk) 21:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[lost edit in progress] Regarding your edit to the talk page for talking about that IP Address, that user specifically allowed me to post in what evolved into the "Jeff G, friends of Jeff G, and amused bystanders please post your comments here" section[2], and some of the warnings I restored for the first time because the user had not admitted to reading them. Now that they have admitted to reading the warnings, it is fair to leave the warnings in the past. I'm sorry if I have been too zealous in restoring deleted warnings to user talk pages.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 01:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see, now. Thanks for pointing that out. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 09:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 09:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Pagrashtak#The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Oracle_of_Seasons_and_Oracle_of_Ages and Turd the Borg (talk)

Thanks for helping out here. You might want to leave a message on his talk page as well. Thanks, Pagrashtak 18:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably if they keep at it; trying a slightly less confrontational path, first, in the hopes that'll work. If somebody else tries a different tack, that's fine with me. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 47 19 November 2007 About the Signpost
An interview with Florence Devouard Author borrows from Wikipedia article without attribution
WikiWorld comic: "Raining animals" News and notes: Page patrolling, ArbCom age requirement, milestones
Wikipedia in the News WikiProject Report: History
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 (talk) 10:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RUM!

The Original Barnstar
For your cognizant understanding of Wikipedia, and your numerous helpful contributions to AN/I, as well as here, among other places. I award you this barnstar! Which incidentally doubles as a shuriken for use against vandals. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 16:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Suh-weet! I'll sleep with it under my pillow, always be prepared. Danke. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful not to slide your hand under your pillow, you might prick yourself and that would be bad. Happy turkey day Luna. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 12:58, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dumb new admin question

I thought hardblocking only had an effect on registered accounts; the documentation's pretty thin about soft/hardblocking in general. I assume that a hardblock on an IP will have a follow-on effect from other IP's? Acroterion (talk) 22:59, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you "hardblock" an IP, you block both registered and unregistered accounts ("softblock" = "anonymous only" checkbox). When you softblock (AO, usually with Account Creation disabled), people that are already registered can edit, but anonymous users can't neither register nor edit. Now, if you're talking about blocking registered users, enabling the Autoblock will effectively block every user that tries to connect or register, and all anonymous editing for 24 hours. -- lucasbfr talk 23:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) It's all a bit complicated, yeah. It may help to distinguish between IP blocks, account blocks, and autoblocks. IP blocks are associated with a particular IP address, regardless of what particular account uses the address (if a hardblock, it will affect all users on the IP; if a softblock, only logged out users). An account block is associated with a particular account, regardless of which particular IP address the account uses. Autoblocks are a third creature, entirely: when an account is blocked with AB enabled, the server will automatically issue a 24-hour autoblock to the last IP the account used... this block won't show up in the IP's block log, though -- WP:AUTOBLOCK should do a decent job explaining that whole affair. Hope that makes sense. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 23:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, in the context of the IP that was bugging Crockspot, changing the IP block (which I set as AO, ACB) to a hardblock was a better option because ... ? That's the part I'm not quite getting (and therefore the "dumb" heading). Acroterion (talk) 23:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. Most times, it won't really matter much, either way, but it can be more important for persistent troublemakers who (sometimes) register sleeper accounts ahead of time to evade anon-only blocks or semi-protection, or may be using open proxies, or may have gladhand accounts which might be using the same IP. I'd call it a combination preventive measure and fishing expedition, to see if any interesting {{unblock-auto}} requests show up. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah - understood now - a strategy. Thanks for the explanations! Acroterion (talk) 23:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Barnstar

Wow, such kind words! I don't know what to say beside that I'm happy not having destroyed anything yet (even if I'm starting considering using the cluestick on some editors, lately) ;) I can't take all the credit for the unblock mailing list, I almost forgot about it for a while, and just cleared some backlog when I remembered I was supposed to hang there. Yamla is doing most of the work (I know, it's rude to point at people). Just... Thank you for your appreciation, it means a lot! (So, when are you dropping school to be fully back? :p) -- lucasbfr talk 23:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Theoretically I'm off school, this week, but for some reason my laptop isn't cooperating with the network, where I'm at, so I'm stuck on some old box that has none of my pretty toys installed, until I fix that. XD Gives me a brief respite from the joys of assembly language programming, though! – Luna Santin (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My eyes still bleed from my last assembly course, 2 years ago (already!). Best of luck for your recovery ;). -- lucasbfr talk 09:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hard block?

Does this need to be a hard block? John Reaves 08:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly. It stems from what looked like sockpuppetry, possibly involving gladhand account(s), if you take a look at the talk history, there was a revealing unblock-auto request (also from a block to do with socks). My thought at the time was that the IP had socks on it, looked at least fairly static and not particularly shared, and it looked like at least East and Clowns felt the same way. If new information has come to light and you think the block should be modified, feel free, so long as you look into it and consider things. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 08:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was asking because of User_talk:RedNeckIQ55#Unblock. He seems like a legitimate user. John Reaves 08:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that myself and was about to comment. Kwsn (Ni!) 08:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I think that's another sock. If you dig a bit, several users have been mentioned and/or blocked as socks, here, including:
Several of them all registered to participate in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Controversial literature and to harass a few people, back in February. A few more showed up in October. I notice RedNeckIQ55 (talk · contribs) was most recently active on 15 November, the same day some of the other socks were registered... and started editing back in February, about the same time all this socking began... and was editing at Controversial literature during that period, and the Category:Survival horror video games CfD other socks were used in. Not to mention several of them are editing in very similar subject areas. They all seem to have a lot in common, more than can be explained by any common coincidence. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow I can't believe how many sock puppets are in some way connected to my blocking from the current IP Address. I really would like not to be entangled into all this so I will just wait out the 2 weeks block of this IP Address. I would also assure you Luna Santin that I'm no vandal or sock puppet and I will respect your opinion on the blocking for the entire two weeks or when this issue has been resolved. - RedNeckIQ55 (talk) 19:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOOK

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=173009827&oldid=173008017

This is clearly administrator abuse.

1. Admin is mad at a checkuser request. Blocks the person. Then uses the excuse that the person is already blocked so no checkuser should be run. A very convincing and specious argument. 2. Admin then page protects the user's talk page so the user can never ask for unblock by uninvolved admin. 3. Complaint appears on ANI so the admin deletes the ANI post and blocks the person who made the edit AND page protects their user page so they can't seek unblock. 4. Admin then calls the complainer a sock of the person that the RFCU was filed against! By calling him a sock, that's a guarantee that nobody will look further.

I saw the ANI then saw it disappear causing me to investigate.

I have a suspicion that the admin is the sock and doesn't want the RFCU run.

I'm a deadman for telling you this. That's what wikipedia is becoming. Do the right thing and be killed (like the others I saw). Jeske needs to be de-sysoped. He's the next Ryulong, a very controversial and savage admin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyeopener (talk • contribs) 00:13, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're mentioning a lot about this admin, that admin, some checkuser request, and apparently really blatant abuse, but you're not taking any trouble to link any of this so that I might actually look into it. You'll need to be specific. Which admin? Which user? Which request? What abuse? Who, what, when, where, why, and how? And why are you registering sockpuppets to spam all over the place? Probably better off emailing ArbCom. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:86.139.179.254

Woops I was reviewing this guy's contribs and blocked while you were discussing on the talk page. Feel free to revert my block :). -- lucasbfr talk 13:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, they pretty much deserved it by then. ;) I was only hesitating as long as I was to make sure there wasn't something else afoot. They look pretty trollish and were bound to get booted out soon enough, anyway. Appreciate the thought, though. – Luna Santin (talk) 13:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Porcupine (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I demand block for this user. Look deeper to see his behaviour. --Sambure (talk) 15:13, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both of you just need to breathe for a minute and calm down. Instead of looking for ways to escalate the conflict, let it simmer for a bit so things improve. Let the AN/I thread handle things. – Luna Santin (talk) 15:15, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All right thank you. That man was jeleous because all the people agree with me to keep the large series of articles.Sambure (talk) 15:19, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't that jealous, actually. I was more annoyed that you kept posting badly-spelled messages all over my nice clean talkpage.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:28, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI - I agree

I applaud your plan; thanks very much. However, I would like Sambure reprimanded over this indescribably childish edit.

I would like to suggest a solution: we both get blocked for two hours, followed by which we don't come back. How's it sound?--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We'll see. ;) Would like to get out of this without pressing those buttons, but that depends on the two of you, mostly. – Luna Santin (talk) 15:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am a constructive and not a destroying person, (like others, I will not tell you the name) I write articles and not fill the other pages with rules and quations to support my inability to write...You know who I mean, I will not tell the name.Sambure (talk) 15:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is, Sambure presses my buttons. Like that comment above, for example.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many other pushed your buttom I suppose. Than your place is not here pal.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sambure (talk • contribs)

Well, you are intentionally trying to piss me off, admittedly... Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Porcupine
I forget him, Oh God he was blocked many times..But I hope my article will not be deleted. Sambure (talk) 15:30, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh, what's that doing there?--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you keep fighting on Luna's page, I will block the both of you. You are, however welcome to argue on my talk page. east.718 at 15:34, November 22, 2007
Apologies on behalf of Sambure for abusing this talkpage. I actually came here to chat to Luna and found this other guy's harassment of me here - check the history!--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

S prot

No problem, open proxies are a specialist subject :), cheers --Herby talk thyme 16:34, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFCU clerk

I have signed up to be an RFCU clerk. I'm an admin and done lots of SSP work and some minor stuff at RFCU. Can you add me to the IRC RFCU clerk room and grant me the bot access? Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should be good to get in. Pretty quiet channel, these days, though... I think the bot's on "vacation." :< – Luna Santin (talk) 22:02, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2007 Australian Election discussion page thing.

Thanks for your input. I was beginning to think I was going insane... Duggy 1138 (talk) 10:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably drowned in the attention going to the election, itself. Ultimately, it's not going to be a huge deal, either way. Might be best if everybody moves on in some salvaged spirit of cooperation, but that's just my take on things. – Luna Santin (talk) 10:46, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little burnt on the election pages myself at the moment. You know that kick in the gut feeling you get after something like this. I'm just surprised by the behaviour of certain people, normally there are arguments of fact, a debate, but the "don't care" or the "some people are more important than you" attitude in this incident really shocked me.
However, your support (rather, you unbias position) has made me feel a lot happier about what has happened. Once again, thanks.
Duggy 1138 (talk) 10:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the help in getting my IP unblocked (70.52.172.145). xD

--Syst3mfailur3 (talk) 03:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to your talk page. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 09:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirections for Deletion

Hello there,

I see you know how to delete redirect pages. Can you please get some deleted for me? On this template, there are a few inconsistencies. Every presidency page should not, in theory, link to the president himself. For example, the article Presidency of James Monroe does not exist, and consequently, does not redirect to James Monroe. However, a few presidency links on here due indeed redirect to the actual president, and these redirection pages should be deleted. The following articles are:

Thanks! =) --MosheA (talk) 04:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While admins technically can delete pages at any time, it's usually a good idea to keep to procedures in usual circumstances -- I don't think these are quite speedy candidates, unless I'm missing something. ;) Would be happy to help compile a redirects for deletion discussion, if you wanted to bring up your request there, though. – Luna Santin (talk) 10:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please. =) That would be great. --MosheA (talk) 16:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing, the nomination is currently up at WP:RFD#Presidency redirects. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:19, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: that autoblock

I remember why I had this blocked. It's the individual in Canada who whitewashes all mentions of Saban's productions from articles they belong in and has also changed dates and whatnot on several other pages. I have tried to contact the ISP, but they have not replied, at all.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Britney Spears on Wheels

Luna, I hope you didn't think I was impersonating an administrator. I just didn't think any administrator wanted to waste their time with that kind of unblock request. Maser (Talk!) 06:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, by the way, ever consider becoming a mediator? Maser (Talk!) 07:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all, some unblock requests are just really stinkin' obvious. :p As far as mediating, I've tried it a few times, I usually go for cases with multiple people involved. Something I can practice on a smaller scale, probably. ;) Appreciate the note, though! – Luna Santin (talk) 22:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 48 26 November 2007 About the Signpost
Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles WikiWorld comic: "Cursive"
News and notes: Ombudsman commission, fundraiser, milestones Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Education in Australia 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 (talk) 08:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

important

– Gurch 09:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kitty! :D Is that how they get all those "interns" down in Florida? – Luna Santin (talk) 22:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry.

I'm really sorry. I was not the one messing with the page. I am working on a report on The Enlightenment Period and my friend was messing with my computer while I was preparing something for me to eat. I'm sorry, it won't happen again. This apology might be unnecessary, but I don't like people thinking of me as a bad person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheManInTheBox66 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to user's talk. – Luna Santin (talk) 04:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom

I'm just curious, would you be interested in running for the arbitration committee elections? I think you would make a great canadate!--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 02:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again

Thanks for helping to clean up the stalker's mess. None of the three admins who "warned" me for my so-called "personal attack" even bothered. Sometimes I do clean it up my self, but sometiems I don't, so admins like Thebainer won't accuse me of violation the WP:DENY and WP:DNFT essays. I'm glad to seee that you are willing to help out rather than pile on. I know I don't always handle things perfectly, but I do try. Mess up once tho, and all the do-gooders will join in on the harassment! Of course, I wouldn't blame them, since the stalker usually goes after the admins who revert and block him. So again, thanks for being different, and for reaching out rather than stomping down. - BillCJ (talk) 06:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Wikipedia

Are being taken away because you didn't pay. :O --CableModem^^ (talk) 10:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Luna_Santin&oldid=174802657"