User talk:Nouse4aname

Rugby Union Project

Hi, and welcome to the Rugby union WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to rugby union.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPRU Announcements}} there.
• Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, peer review, and a collaboration of the fortnight.
• We have a Fiji rugby task force that focus on Fiji related rugby union articles.
• Our requests page has extensive lists of requested articles.
• We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorisation, and other issues that you may find useful.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Cometstyles 15:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

:Since you have done marvelous contributions to rugby, I would like you to part of our Wiki Project and I know you have been on Wikipedia for a long time so this is more of "join our group" then an actual welcome

Cardiff Blues

On the squad listing, I felt it appropriate to have both Australian and Welsh flags next to Luke Evans and Ben White. Both these players are Australians - but they have made themselves available to Wales. I thought it sensible to reflect this dual nationality. Do you disagree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve1978 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The Classic Crime

Would you like to join the dissuction that we are having on the bands genre. we are trying to see if they are a christian band or not. and see if they are anymore genre besides Emo. oh ya isnt the band an Indie Rock band.

Prod

I've removed the prod at Smash (song). I disagreed with the reasoning. If you would like to pursue the issue further, you can list it at WP:AfD. Thanks. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 19:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Smash (song)

Upon first glance, it looked notable. Looking at it now, I don't think it is. If you'd like me to list it on AfD, I will for you. Sorry for the inconvenience. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 15:05, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Angels and Airwaves move

May I ask why you moved the Angels and Airwaves page to Angels & Airwaves after it was just moved back by an administrator to the aforementioned location? Furthermore, why was the move not discussed in the talk page? Enfestid 14:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I got the title changed back to Angels and Airwaves after someone changed it to fit the official typeface. Please see Wikipedia:Requested Moves#June_24.2C_2007. According to the history, after this movie (which was done by an administrator), you then moved the page to Angels & Airwaves. Why?

Enfestid 14:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I believe you are mistaken. He was the admin who moved the page back to Angels and Airwaves -- he didn't use the official typeface. I think you mistakenly moved the page.

Enfestid 15:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

towns

I know it sounds weird, but all towns and villages and other inhabited places are considered notable at WP as long as there is any information to show they exist, no matter how small. Consistently upheld at AfD, so no point nominating for deletion. DGG (talk) 21:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Green Day

Hi, I've seen you frequently around the article Green Day and other related articles. Please consider joining the Green Day WikiProject, an effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage and detail regarding Green Day. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks that you can help with. Thank you for your time.

WikiProject Rugby union national team Improvement Drive

For the 2007 Rugby World Cup WikiProject Rugby union is launching an Improvement Drive for national rugby union teams; specifically those participating in the Rugby World Cup.

We need your help! Here is what you can do:

• Adopt a national rugby union team article and collaborate with other members to improve it.
• Find, create and upload free images that will help improve these articles.
• Copy-edit, reference, and expand articles when and where you can.
• Promote the project and encourage others to join.

The World Cup is fast approaching and these articles are going to get a lot more hits during the tournament. It would be great if we could have them at a high standard!

For more information see the discussion on the WikiProject Rugby union talk page here.

Shudde ^talk 05:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

run-on teams

They are best placed on 2007 pages, please feel free to create one. There are many NRL and UK Super League ones out there for you to use as a template. Londo06 17:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Well done for making the effort to move all the things through to 2007 season pages. Will flesh the articles out to include signings, contract extensions, etc. Top effort though. Londo06 11:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Went through and fleshed them out from your initial efforts. Londo06 09:46, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

NRL ones have cited sources. They will be brought back to be retrospective. Londo06 13:46, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Batley Bulldogs 2007

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Batley Bulldogs 2007, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 18:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Fixed the 2007 page Londo06 21:10, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Panic! At the Disco Citations

Please stop removing citations needed for the articles Panic! At the Disco and A Fever You Can't Sweat Out, and please stop changing the format for the genre. Now first off you put a citation needed in the "The album is split in two, with tracks 1 through 7 featuring futuristic instruments such as synthesizers and drum machines and tracks 9 through 13 using traditional instruments such as the accordion and a Vaudevillian piano. Track 8 serves as a link between the two halves, beginning with techno-style dance beats before switching to piano." part of the article which doasn't make sense because anyone whos ever heard the album would tell you that's exactly what it does, plus in the reviews they also mentions that this happens. Secondly on the "The album primarily deals with social issues that the band points on through various songs. Topics such as sanctity of marriage, adultery, drug addiction, prostitution, and religion are woven throughout the album. Guitarist Ryan Ross also relates two of the songs to living with his alcoholic father" all you have to do is read the lyrics and it tells you this as well, and for the Ryan's alchoholic father part it tells you in the link that Nails For Breakfast, Tacks For Snacks and Camisado are both about Ryan's alchoholic father, or you can ask any serious fan of Panic! At the Disco. Thirdly for the "The first track, "Introduction", contains a sample of what appears to be a radio broadcast in Polish. The speaker is saying "...spotkało się z szerokim rozgłosem", which means "...gained significant popularity." part I speak Polish and have also had a friend from Poland state that this is true. We come back to how Nails For Breakfast, Tacks For Snacks and Camisado are about Ryan's father again which I've already explained is true. Now the last one that makes me happy is that you say that "Time to Dance" is entirely based on Invisible Monsters." needs a citation when in the link that states all the other songs references and meanings it states the EXACT same thing. So please leave Panic! At the Disco and A Fever You Can't Sweat Out alone when I delete the citations needed yet again otherwise I'll have to report you. Knight Whitefire 19:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

2004 Warped Tour Compilation

Hello. I know we went back and forth a couple times on a track listing for the 2004 Warped Tour Compilation CD's. Could you take a look at the discussion and let me know what you think? Rossi27530 06:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC) (Moved from user page Nouse4aname 15:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC))

Lying Is The Most Fun A Girl Can Have Without Taking Her Clothes Off

Sorry Nouse4aname I was just trying to fix an error in the title of the article and the song name in general for wikipedia becase it really is supposed to be all capitals. Knight Whitefire 02:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Artist Genres

Thanks for the info. I just assumed that they were supposed to be separated by commas because in the sample infobox they are. Tim Y (talk) 13:26, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Appreciation

Hi there! I see your name all over the 'pedia and I thought I'd just say: great work! The work you do is really appreciated.

Seraphim ^Whipp 14:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Lyrics

Why the hell did you remove the lyrics from the Panic! at the Disco articles? They weren't not supposed to be there, were they? I thought they were a valuable addition to the article. If you screw around like that again I'm going to report you for vandalism. JazzlineB (talk) 20:37, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. Concerning the above user, I know that they have treated you unkindly, but he is a new user and we should extend our courtesy a lot further to new people because they don't know wiki policies. His attitude was unacceptable but it's up to us old hands to point out, kindly, where they're going wrong.

Best, Seraphim ^Whipp 13:51, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I have erased my message. I'm sorry about posting it.

I'm sorry for not controlling my temper. I'm sorry for the many uncivil messages on Talk:Ryan Ross and User talk:Seraphim Whipp as well as here. Again I'm very sorry JazzlineB (talk) 16:00, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

and if you are interested in Panic! at the Disco, have you joined the Panic at the Disco Wikiproject? JazzlineB (talk) 16:00, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Ryan Ross

I'm sorry I didn't restrain myself on the Talk:Ryan Ross page: I said "shit". I'm sorry. I used that word because two of the photos I posted for Brent Wilson and Jon Walker were kept around, then abruptly deleted, as one had a copyright on it, and I don't know about the other picture. Sorry again, hope this doesn't happen any more. JazzlineB (talk) 16:14, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Helpful Hint

As a warning, there is a user going around vandalising Panic! at the Disco related pages, (which I know you edit frequently) such as Brent Wilson (look for the latest contribution by K-bomb260 in the history. He has also vandalised my talk page and Seraphim Whipp's talk pageJazzline b! (talk) 15:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits! Keep up the good work on the P!atD articles.Jazzline b! (talk) 19:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC) JazzlineB 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.

Category suggestion

Hi. When you add a group to a more specific category, you should remove them from the more general parent categories. For example, if you add Category:American funk musical groups, remove Category:Funk musical groups and Category:American musical groups. Thanks. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 02:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedies

Hi, I can't help but notice that a few of your nominations for speedy are inappropriate. Can you please consider either nominating things for AfD instead? It would be great if you could provide me a list of bands you're A7'ing, so I can rewrite/recreate anything that's deleted inappropriately (all too common with bands pages these days). Chubbles (talk) 11:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I added the chart hit line for Clare Quilty; the Allmusic bio was linked at the bottom but nobody had added that information. My problem is, plenty of band articles get speedied unnecessarily, because no one bothers to check whether or not the band is actually notable before they tag it. Remember, what we should be looking for is not the current state of the page, but the inherent notability of the subject - which was the case for Clare Quilty. Running a Google search or an Allmusic check before nominating a speedy would be a big help, and would probably save a lot of people's hard work from being deleted. Also, if you speedy something and it gets deleted (which can happen in a matter of minutes), I have no way of knowing that, so the edit summary you provide is moot. Chubbles (talk) 13:11, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Just a note - The fact that AfD takes five days shouldn't dissuade you from using it! Speedies involve only two people and are "hidden" once the article is deleted. AfD's are transparent and allow people to "rescue" articles that deal with notable subject but aren't currently up to snuff. Remember, whatever we delete is potentially of use to someone, and people should be given the chance to prove its worth. Chubbles (talk) 13:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

It's unfortunate that you are so nonchalant about this. Would you be willing to meet me halfway here? You are going through a large number of band articles, which is an area I edit heavily. Could you perhaps provide me a list of articles that look speedy-worthy, as you go through? If you could give me a day or two to go through them and save the salvageable ones, I'd really appreciate it; there's no hurry, and even if there were an extra day doesn't mean much. It would probably result in the betterment of a bunch of notable music articles, and after a day or two you can nuke off the ones that don't meet WP:MUSIC. But once they're gone, they're gone, and I can't even tell they're gone. Chubbles (talk) 14:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I'll see if I can help you out; I try to put everything I come across into local categories by state or city. Chubbles (talk) 14:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Further note: I had to go to WP:DRV to get Bazuka restored. Charting a hit makes a group notable. Chubbles (talk) 23:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks; no objections on KUMA or VIH. Chubbles (talk) 12:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

The Working Man's Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For your refusal to give up on Category:American musical groups! •97198 talk 12:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Re:Apologize (song)

Hi. I've made a comment in the talk page and will keep watch of it for responses. I'm not impressed with that IP user's stubborn behaviour on this issue with many people disagree. RaNdOm26 (talk) 09:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

P!atD 08

I'm sure you have seen the new article for the upcoming Panic at the Disco album. Doesn't it seem strange that so many editors would go to the trouble of maintaining a page for an article that doesn't exist yet? I don't even think that article should exist until it has been released, don't you? JazzlineB (talk) 00:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

• They removed the deletion tag! It's still mostly speculation... "Nine in the Afternoon" will most likely be the new single", though there are references. The other thing, they keep changing the info, first "Middle of Summer" and "Things Have Changed" are the same, then they are different songs. I don't know if you feel this way, but I'm getting sort of pissed off at Knight Whitefire. He's told us he's just siked for new music, but he's not paying to his mistakes. Also, he says he is maintaining the new album's page. Did he just declare that or did an administrator say he could? He can't even spell "grammar". Sorry if this is sounding like complaining. JazzlineB (talk) 04:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

The Used

Hi Nouse, I just wanted to apologize for reverting your category thing on that page. I had tried to undo the edit I wanted reverted, but it wouldn't let me for some reason, so I just used the revert option. Thanks for not seeming to be mad about it. Carl.bunderson (talk) 18:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Nine in the Afternoon

Can you please not put a proposed deletion tag on Nine in the Afternoon? It is going to be released in just maybe two weeks, and so I'd have to recreate that article. Respond on my talk page. Cheers, and keep up the good work. JazzlineB (talk) 23:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

bond vs Bond

Hi. Considering that pretty much every reference to do with "bond" has the lowercase "b" (for the reason mentioned in the article), shouldn't we honour that here? ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 20:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Dirty Magic

An editor has nominated Dirty Magic, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dirty Magic and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 13:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

again, nine in the afternoon

This is getting on my nerves. People are going to want to delete the article if there's no release date for the song. I was also really looking forward to the music video, but that's not my point. Do you think this article will be deleted now that there isn't a specific release date? That's why the page was redirected last time. 24.18.180.44 (talk) 17:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

In response to the above IP address Yes I was worried about the same thing. I know that the music video hasn't been released, so it obviously wasn't released on the 1st, right. The website was supposedly hacked, which I can believe. Nouse4aname, do you think "You Don't Have To Worry" might be the album title? I'm betting on "Pretty Odd". JazzlineB (talk) 17:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Category:American nu-metal musical groups has been superseded

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:American nu-metal musical groups, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:American nu-metal musical groups has been superseded by a similar category (typos in name, expanding abbreviations, fixing capitalisation, renaming to comply with the "by country" format and conversions from singular to plural or vice versa). (CSD C2).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:American nu-metal musical groups, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 23:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Doppelganger?

Hi, are you and Nouseforaname312 (talk · contribs) related? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I just happened to notice the two names on my watchlist editing on related topics and it piqued my curiosity. (He made an edit to Stem cell just a few hours before you did some trimming to [[Geron Corporation.) I thought it an odd coincidence that the two of you would come up with such similar – and unusual – user names. What are the odds that two people would choose Nouse for a name? Then I re-parsed your username (Oh...no use...) and it made more sense. Cheers, TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Spaces after punctuation

Hi. Nouseforaname thankyou for the advice. As you can see, I'm trying to improve. Cheers Northmetpit (talk) 11:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Moving from user page. Nouse4aname (talk) 12:40, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Musical groups

AWB only does CategoryA → CategoryB batch jobs; it really isn't very good at doing CategoryA → B-C-D-E-or-F jobs in one step. Sorting further into subcategories requires at least two separate AWB runs — it just can't be done that way in one batch. Bearcat (talk) 09:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'll be doing that. Bearcat (talk) 09:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I've left behind exactly three articles that I wasn't sure what to do with, if you could take a look at those. Bearcat (talk) 09:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh, no worries. AWB really does make things a lot easier (especially when you get one of those 800+ categories that needs diffusion), but I can see how it might look like somebody's doing it wrong if you're not familiar with it. Bearcat (talk) 10:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Thrice34

Hey, if you catch this fellow starting wars again, I'd say it'd be worth the while to report him to WP:SSP. Probably an open-and-shut case, considering the overlap in articles edited and the static IP from which he edits. Chubbles (talk) 18:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Rustong141

Sorry my bad, im new at this!

List of power pop musicians

Please note: Notability guidelines do not directly limit article content --neonwhite user page talk 17:45, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Considering the lead begins "This is a list of notable bands and musicians..." (emphasis added), then that immediately states that notability is a prequisite for that particular list. In addition, what use is there in having a red-link to a non-notable band? It provides little, if any information to a viewer. Furthermore, that link you provide in no way says that a list can include non-notable people or groups... Nouse4aname (talk) 08:56, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Not having an article on wikipedia is not evidence that a band isn't notable. Take Einstein's Sister for example, they don't yet have an article but would likely be notable considering the sources available [1][2] and Reggie and the full effect [3][4][5] I object to the blanket removal of all red links, assuming they aren't notable. There are many lists on wikipedia that contain entries that don't have articles. --neonwhite user page talk 17:10, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps not, but there is little point in having a red link in the list. It leads nowhere and thus serves no purpose. As articles are created they can easily be added in, but a list full of red links to bands that may not be notable is just asking for articles to be created that probably shouldn't be. Nouse4aname (talk) 17:56, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Category:American musical groups

You really ought to read what's on User:Gary King's talk page already. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 15:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Boxes...

Thanks for making the nice Six Nations infobox! Yours looks a hell of a lot better then the one I proposed. Should we get the others deleted? Now we just need to start making the articles! Great weekend though...oggi oggi oggi! Gareth E Kegg (talk) 00:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Heineken Cup

Thanks, dude. I'm doing this to after copy it to the portuguese Wikipedia, because we don't have so much information about rugby in this language, specially here in Brazil where the sport is almost unknown... Maxtremus (talk) 23:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Home, Five and Six Nations articles

Hey. Great work getting all those articles done. We've finally caught up with the French! They got it done ages ago. I remember I made a slow start creating some of them, but brilliant to see you have finished the job, great work! - Shudde ^talk 04:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I sourced it from the French as well. They are pretty reliable I think. - Shudde ^talk 00:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

thefakesoundofprogress

Your point is invalid. The title of the album is thefakesoundofprogress. It's lowercase because that's how it was titled, and therefore the appropriate way to spell it is how it was originally titled. Therefore, keep it lowercase. If you wish to discuss it, don't change it, but discuss it on the talk page, where, if you'll notice, it was already decided that the title was lowercased, unless you're talking about the song which is The Fake Sound of Progress. Imasleepviking ( talk ) 15:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, it should have been, but either way, discuss it there.Imasleepviking ( talk ) 15:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The Used

You ran into USEDfan and 66.195.30.2 recently. They are the same user. Other sock puppets of his are Booowooo and Usedfan1989, the latter of which has apparently been banned for this very reason.[6] You can tell they are sockpuppets because they make the same edits, and have that trademark red-linked user page. He has even pretended to "agree" with his other accounts.[7] I haven't bothered taking action with him until now, because he has made some great contributions to articles related to The Used, but now he is just being disruptive, and outright defiant.[8][9] I think what should be done is block the accounts, and temporarily block the IP from editing The Used and The Used Discography, because elsewhere, the edits are for the most part constructive, except for an isolated vandalism spree.[10][11][12][13] --Pwnage8 (talk) 18:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

used disc

You are the one making changes without taking, I'm with the oteher users, your doing the damage.Booowooo (talk) 19:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

related acts

dan was in 3 othe rbands beside new transit so ur saying they shud all be lsited there too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by USEDfan (talk • contribs) 19:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

.

u threat to block used fan, i saw the edits going on 4 a while, so im joining in, cause u are wrong, so im gona edit so sum1 smart like him or her doesnt get banned —Preceding unsigned comment added by Booowooo (talk • contribs) 19:23, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

April 2008

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Toddst1 (talk) 19:26, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Nouse4aname (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

How dare you! I have attempted to engage these editors in discussion, which they ignore. I was in the middle of attempting to report the vandalism and suspect sockpuppetry when I receive this. Look at the edit histories, look at my history. I have done nothing wrong (except break the 3RR, but only to combat vandalism, but to no avail hence I was attempting to report it

Decline reason:

You were revert-warring (I count at least four reverts) both before and after you posted to the talk page, which is no good if you continue with the edit-war. As for the vandalism claim, I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Vandalism#What_vandalism_is_not, because all I'm seeing is a content dispute. If you have some specific sockpuppetry claim to make, you can make it after the block expires.— chaser - t 19:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

{{unblock|Yes, I admit I was edit warring, however with two pages affected, I lost count. As I stated before, I was in the middle of trying to report the vandalism, and had in fact stopped attempting to revert it myself, assuming that they would soon be blocked.It never occurred to me that I too would be blocked. Can you explain to me why I wasnt even shown the courtesy of a single warning first? Perhaps after having been here over a year, with no history of blocks before I was expecting a little more respect, evidently this was too much to ask.}}

I cannot believe I have been blocked! If you now look at the history of the pages in question, The Used adn The Used discography, you will see another user identified those edits as vandalism. Fair enough, I violated 3RR, but with good reason. I had reported it at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Persistent_vandalism_at_The_Used_and_The_Used_discography, and was in the process of reporting at Wikipedia:AIV when I encountered the block. Nouse4aname (talk) 19:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, I did not even receive the courtesy of a warning Nouse4aname (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I have drawn the attention of the blocking admin to the situation, and to your comments. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the unblock. I will be more careful with edit warring in future! Sorry for the hassle and cheers Nouse4aname (talk) 19:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 19:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Though it seems I am still unable to edit? Becuase "You are unable to edit Wikipedia because someone using the same internet address (an 'IP address') or shared proxy server as you was blocked. Your ability to edit Wikipedia has been automatically suspended as a result." Is it possible to resolve this? Nouse4aname (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

You might want to post {{autoblock}} on your talk page--it'll draw the attention of admins. Blueboy96 20:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I've lifted the autoblock. - auburnpilot talk 20:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to all involved, and again, sorry for getting caught up in this edit war! I will begin conflict resolution process tomorrow if these users persist. Cheers. Nouse4aname (talk) 20:19, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't catch that autoblock. Toddst1 (talk) 20:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

I'll be busy tonight, so I won't be able to get to it now. When I come back in a few hours, I'll file the report. Since you're unblocked now, could you possibly do it? I see that you've been dealing with it, and I think it would be better for you to finish off. --Pwnage8 (talk) 21:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Warning

Please stop changing genre delimiters. I usually wouldn't care as the pages you are editing are not ones I'm interested in, however, changing genre delimiters (as you seem to be changing line breaks to comma breaks under the guise of "formatting infobox[es]", only incites edit wars. Please stop. General consensus is to leave genre delimiters as they are for now. Leave line breaks as line breaks and comma breaks as comma breaks. Thanks. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 23:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

You are directly lying to this user. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 10:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

As i've been asked to clarify this statement: You, Navnlos, are telling a straight out lie here trying to convince a user he is obliged to not do something that you consider to be wrong. In that respect: Please stop. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 10:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

No I am not. I mean to protect wikipedia and keep the armistice we made a few months ago about genre delimiters as you would know twsx. There is a general consensus as to leave genre delimiters be as changing them causes edit wars. As for me being reported to ANI, Nouse4aname, all I can say is that I'm a busy person and I do a lot of vandalism protection and sometimes I put warnings against people by accident when they were actually just taking out a bad reference or something. It's hardly my fault. They should explain more on their edit summaries. However, perhaps I should assume more good faith. But that doesn't change that there is a general consensus (you can look at the archives for the talk page for the template for musical infoboxes) to not change genre delimiters. A consensus that is hard to enforce I admit and that twsx himself broke and ignores, though he has been warned a few times before (and not just by me) and because of this he can't even change the genre delimiters on Amon Amarth and Dissection. My apologies if you think the warning was inappropriate, but that general consensus is in place and I would like to keep to it even though some people have forgotten about it. I happen to still remember a few months ago when there was a huge genre delimiter edit war that made people not focus on good editing but constantly reverting each other, and I don't want to go back to that. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

That hardly clears things up, but I can see I won't be getting asny further with you. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

1. Do not bring up some consensus as an argument if you cannot prove it exists.
2. Being busy is no excuse for making mistakes and being incivil - you are responsible for your edits no matter what.
3. Actually I have only been warned by you and Kameejl, both of which were engaged in the "war" and are therefore just as biased towards the matter as i am myself.
4. I happen to still remember a few months ago when there was a huge genre delimiter edit war that made people not focus on good editing but constantly reverting each other - .. which you just so happen to undoubtedly have been the most active participant of. :)

It is still funny though, having to defend oneself on a users talk page which is filled with complaints of such an impressive amount of distinguished users.. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 11:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Woopsie, my bad, i thought this was on Navnlos' talk page. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 11:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

As for you. I don't care what you say but you damn well know there is a consensus on what I'm saying. Also, you have been warned by others and to say it was just me and kameejl is blatant lying. As for the genre delimiter edit war, you make no sense. Yes, I was involved with it, but so were you and a huge number of individuals. You want to pin it on me as I was on a different side than you, but we all agreed to disagree and that no one was right. To label me as as "the most active participant" is bullshit. Would you like to look in my sandbox again? User:Navnløs/Sandbox. Looks to me like you were way more active than me, and guess who can't change the Amon Amarth or Dissection genre delimiters now? It's not me. The admins fell on my side. And my talk page hardly has that many complaints on it. Only recently has it had a few complaints on it and it was only over the warnings I handed out the other day. I've already admitted to being blocked in the past...What of it? People change, and wisdom/ time prevails. Scarian, a user and admin that even you respect twsx, nominated me for adminship, which would not have happened if he still believed I was as bad as you claim I am. So enough. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Haha, this is too precious to comment in detail – you got it all so wrong. :) ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 22:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: Confused...

Sorry about that. I was trying to be blunt, but turns out i was just not declerative. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 11:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

boo!

i found an article about the new album, if u r a fan of the ussed go read the 4th studio album section of the bio cause its great stuff!

YOUR FRIEND USEDfan (talk) 20:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: Wrong user

Eh, I don't really care. He posted his comment on the wrong page (supposedly), so I responded to it. Whether he sees it or not, I care not. He has already revealed to many other editors what kind of user he is (no, I am not saying all his edits are bad or that he is a horrible person). You can choose to believe whoever you want, it's not my problem. Just the fact that I got nominated for adminship by a user that both me and twsx respect greatly should tell you something (and no, not that he made a mistake). Sure I'm opinionated about certain things, but the majority of my edits are to protect and better wikipedia through vandal reversion/warning/reporting and adding helpful refs/sources/info to articles. I'm not saying twsx doesn't do these things either (I really wouldn't know, I do not stalk his edits and we mostly edit different things) but I'm just saying what kind of user I am. I'll let that speak for itself. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting how you so often seem to be defending yourself then....Nouse4aname (talk) 19:55, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't need to, but I feel compelled as I don't want to look like the "bad guy" as twsx would paint me. Yes, I'm defensive. Your point? As I said, I will just let my edits, etc. speak for themselves in the present and future. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 22:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry I was unable to file the report myself. Some stuff came up, and I'm only now getting back to Wikipedia. But you did a good job for your first try. It looks great for now. Oh yeah, and the reason I posted about the sockpuppetry on your talk page is because I thought you were an administrator <_< Oh well, things worked out ok. Cheers. --Pwnage8 (talk) 04:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

User page comments

I saw that, and I remember reverting one of his/her edits recently. I didn't know that their question had anything to do with the on-going content dispute they have, and I KNEW you 3 aren't socks of each other. :) Wildthing61476 (talk) 16:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

82.38.65.47 and Genres

Hi. 82.38.65.47 has once again been changing the genres of band/album/song articles. I saw you gave him a final warning about it, and I thought you'd like to know about his edits and maybe report him to WP:AIV or something. Thanks. Timmeh! 10:48, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Apparent vandalism

Please can you explain the articles that you have recently converted to redirects? LittleOldMe (talk) 14:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I get it. Sorry I was being thick. LittleOldMe (talk) 14:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Sorry to cast aspersions. I too am suffering long day syndrome. regards LittleOldMe (talk) 14:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome

No problem, saw that on RC Patrol and figured it was a bit of a vandalism that needed to be cleared. Wildthing61476 (talk) 19:36, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thy Serpent/EP

Ah, I see you moved the page. Thanks for helping. I just thought there was probably another article of the same name of so I kept the title. But thanks. Are you personlly interested in Thy Serpent? JazzlineB (talk) 01:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh I see. Well, I've sort of moved away from editing Panic at the Disco since I heard their new CD, and now I'm focusing on "foreign" music. (Thy Serpent is Finnish). JazzlineB (talk) 15:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

wtf=

are u talking about, ur the one who completly changes pages without premission, and isnt it past ur bed time? USEDfan (talk) 09:15, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

thats because every1 is wrong, and im right, the way i see it its either my way or my way ...and why are u on american sites if u live in the uk. USEDfan (talk) 09:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

im 19 and ur prob liek 15 with ur ignorance level, and its obvious ur young because any time u have a problem with me instead of being a man and taking it head on u go cry to a wiki admin or ur mom for help and report me, thats mature, be a tatle tale. USEDfan (talk) 09:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

how old are u? 10? being a baby aint to be proud of so shallow ur pride kido, u have a myspace? we can be cyber freinds. USEDfan (talk) 09:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

u continue to refuse to answe ur age, ur obvious a young teen who thinks they are perfect and the world revolves around them, mommy and daddy prob buy u everything u need and want and thats why u have a spoiled weiny attitude that everything shud be the way u want. ur 16 right? USEDfan (talk) 09:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

ok i suppose u meant to type 15, male, 8th grade, self center, and yes i am alwys right ty 4 pointing that out. USEDfan (talk) 09:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

ur 25, live with ur parents, obviously have no job since ur always online, 4 some reason u have nothing better to do then realize i edited my talk page which i have no idea why u wud look at, it seems like u have a lot to learn cause ur showing me u havnet done much with ur life, i feel bad 4 u in a way, ur prob single, a mamas boy id assume and a pc nerd who sits on their computer all day, and doesnt let any1 make changes and memories all these rules and codes, id maybe give u a hug to cheer u up if i was over there :] . USEDfan (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 09:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

i think im gona try to get some sleep since its almost 6 am here, idk y u edit th eused page but i realli wish u never started to, its been a big problem, u no when u make an apple pie and one apple is bad, it ruins the whole pie, well ur the bad apple. g-nite USEDfan (talk) 09:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Sponsored names

Like I said to User:Londo06, it is common practice on WP:FOOTY not to name leagues' articles after their sponsored titles. For example, the article is Premier League, not Barclays Premier League. I just thought this was common practice on Wikipedia. Regardless, there are redirects from the sponsored names to the current names, so nothing is affected. – PeeJay 16:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. I mean, the Celtic League article was only moved to Magners League as recently as about a month ago, I just missed it until yesterday. As for the Guinness Premiership, I'm not sure it's ever been known by an unsponsored name, but since it's had so many different sponsors, "English Premiership" seemed the most appropriate title, with "rugby union" serving as a disambiguator, as "English Premiership" on its own redirects to Premier League. – PeeJay 17:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

added a bit at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rugby union that will hopefully open up the debate. Just a little note left there, feel free to flesh out the conversation there.Londo06 17:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

used

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Used#Genre_paragrah_settlement

please go there and leave a comment, i think ur version migh tbe th eresolution. USEDfan (talk) 02:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Premier League updates

As far as I am aware, news agencies like the BBC and Sky have to pay a fee to the Premier League in order to publish fixtures and live scores. Obviously the same restrictions do not apply to final results, but I'm pretty sure we're not allowed to display live Premier League scores. – PeeJay 14:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Too right. And as much as we wish it wasn't true, everything's a business these days. If your costs outweight your income, you don't survive. – PeeJay 15:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Quite likely. And it's a shame really. Really puts the brakes on all those independent fansites out there. – PeeJay 15:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Katagory V

Hi, sorry it's taken so long to get back to you, I don't get on here as often as I'd like. My decision regarding this was (to memory) based on there being no discography in the deleted version. I felt the discography tipped the balance and (my personal acid test) I could find the albums on Amazon. Basically I could see potential in the article. It seems since then it has survived an AfD and grown a lot. I'd only speedily delete an article under the recreation of deleted material criterion if it was a duplicate (or near duplicate) of what was deleted before. Even then I'd look to see if I agreed with the original reason for deletion. I hope this makes my position clearer. Thanks, Mallanox 21:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

,

once u complete a paragraph for the used discovery, then add it in, dont do half ass work cause it looks and osunds bad, once u complete the paragaph put it in and then ill make all the corrections but dont just put a half apragraph in the wikipeida. USEDfan (talk) 21:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

wah wah wah. dont be so angry, u dont own the site and ur acting like u do. USEDfan (talk) 08:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Funeral for a Friend

You removed the following - "Due to technical issues in the studio, the band has been forced to cancel their European festival dates in order to ensure that the album is released this year." - because it was unsourced. Fair enough. But the only source is a myspace blog, and I know that Wikipedia doesn't accept myspace blogs as references. So what to do? U-Mos (talk) 16:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll probably wait because that's the sort of thing that will be put on their official non-myspace site, which is currently down. U-Mos (talk) 17:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

used

if i remember correctly u are a 25 year old sucesful well educated man, and u have nothing better in life then to worry about a tiny little - ..*shakes head in amazment* also if we are gona follow that it says only studio albums shud be in the chronicalongal thingy or w/e its called. USEDfan (talk) 18:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC) Yeah the chronicalongal thingy lol. Landon1980 (talk) 21:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

ur the kid that needs to mature and grow up, it shows nothing b4 it and u make a big deal out of it. USEDfan (talk) 22:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

and how come u didnt chang eit to jus the studio albums just like the rule said it shud, u only follow what u like. USEDfan (talk) 22:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

if it is blank its showing th eband broke up, and is not releasing anything else, also sotp removing the - in demos, it shows there is nothing released b4 it, a - represesnts nothing which is why we put them on the singles table, to represent nothing where they didnt chart, please stop removing this info, thanx. USEDfan (talk) 20:09, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

u only follow wha tu want, the studio albums shud only be lsited in the chronogicall as said by th erule u told me to read, then we shud remove the - from the singles table too if it represents nothing acording to u right? USEDfan (talk) 20:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

the used have already confirmed the year jack so we do no the year, anything thing u dont like u dont no, we follow half the rules and thne sya ht eother rule doesnt count, all u do is customize everyhting to how u want it, how does a "25 year old succesful educated man" have nohting better do to in life then worry about a tiny little - being on a page that no1 cares about or wud prob notice, i feel bad 4 u if this is the case. USEDfan (talk) 20:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

No one cares about your favourite band's demo album? That seems strange. Do you even know what you're talking about? --Pwnage8 (talk) 21:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

You've been blocked for edit warring. See this. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Nouse4aname (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was not edit warring. I was restoring articles to a format that has been agreed upon by consensus here and here. The user provided no valid reasons for their edits, whereas I provided sufficient information, links etc to them. Furthermore, the revert war ceased a while ago, and this block seems to be punishment rather than prevention

Decline reason:

That's not a valid exception to 3RR. — Wikiacc (¶) 21:18, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Nouse4aname (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

How about the fact that this block is clearly punishment and not to prevent more reverting

Decline reason:

As I noted here, blocks for edit warring seem perfectly appropriate for both accounts. WP:3RR: Do not participate in edit wars. Rather than reverting repeatedly, discuss the matter with others. For future issues, please seek dispute resolution. — Scientizzle 21:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Nouse4aname (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

OK, so it seems that no one is willing to directly respond to my question. The last mainspace revert I made was at 21:12 (see [14] and [15]). Nearly one hour later I was blocked; see here [16]. Now, considering the reverts had ceased an hour before this block, please explain to me how this block is preventative rather than simple punishment, which I feel is in direct opposition to Wikipedia:Blocking policy. I subsequently was engaged in a revert war on my own talk page, in which I was removing a 3RR warning. I appealed for help to deal with this situation [17], and it seems that as a result of asking for help, I was subsequently blocked. Hardly encouragement to seek admin intervention in future, is it? Now, on to the reasoning behind the "edit wars". Firstly, this user has been extremely disruptive for the past several months, insisting that his view is correct and that everyone else is wrong [18]. Essentially there were two things that I was reverting, which I felt I was entirely right in doing. Firstly was the addition of a "-" to the "last album/last single" field of infoboxes in the articles Demos from the Basement and A Box Full of Sharp Objects. As agreed here and here, the standard of formatting is to leave this field blank. This allows for a consistent, and more professional style throughout wikipedia. I was simply trying to maintain this, and felt that reverting the addition of the "-" was justified - what possible argument could there be to include it in these articles but not the thousands of others? The second was adding an unnamed, unlinked "TBA (2008)" to the most recent album/single infoboxes of Shallow Believer and Paralyzed (song). As neither song nor album has been released, are still untitled, may not even be out this year, let alone the fact that they do not have articles, according to the same formatting styles linked above, these fields should also be left blank, at least until an article is created. Again, what possible argument could there be to include this when such additions are regularly removed from other articles without argument. Thus I removed this also. I clearly explained to the user why I was making the edits described above, and considering that I felt I had a large consensus behind me, I felt entirely justified in reverting his edits, which I felt were disruptive and bordering on vandalism. This user was simply displaying the same stubborn, uncooperative attitude that he has become known for. It is not just myself that has reverted his edits, several other editors have been involved too. I am rather offended at how I have been treated here, and am somewhat disappointed at the complete lack of support that I have been shown when dealing with an obviously disruptive editor. I admit that I should not have continued reverting his edits, however I could see no logic for what he was doing, and he himself gave no valid reason for his edits, whereas I clearly explained, all of mine. I have been a contributor for over a year, and have made over 10,000 positive edits to wikipedia, however I am now seriously considering whether I want to remain part of this project.

Decline reason:

This request is too long. Please be more concise. —  Sandstein  16:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I've heard it all now, too long? That is surely not a fair or just reason to decline an unblock. Imagine that sort of attitude in court...sorry sir, your defense is too long, therefore you must be guilty. Absolutely ridiculous. Nouse4aname (talk) 18:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

TOO LONG?? Did I read that correctly? That is ridiculous. It is a shame there are admins that are too damn lazy to even read an unblock request if it is "too long" I didn't realize there were a set character limit for the template. Landon1980 (talk) 01:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Nouse4aname, an independent admin will review the unblock request above. I've come to the conclusion that the block should have been for 24 hours, but to save your block log getting messy it will be better if I simply unblock after that time instead of resetting. My next point will be of no comfort to you, but it's that in a surprisingly high proportion of cases the person who reports bad behaviour to the admin noticeboards gets blocked for bad behaviour themselves. I believe this block to be entirely in line with the purpose and goals listed at the very top of the blocking policy. And I hope it will be effective. This edit warring has been going on for ever, it's becoming increasingly uncivil, and moreover, as you've detailed above, it's usually completely lame. I'll also quote again the relevant part from 3RR, "Rather than reverting repeatedly, discuss the matter with others. If an action really requires reversion, some other editor will probably do it — and that will serve the vital purpose of showing that the community at large is in agreement over which course of action is preferable". There is no shortage of regular editors on these articles who can fulfil this role, and no shortage of admins who would block USEDfan for 3RR. As for USEDfan, he is surfing close to a ban and he will find his blocks escalating sharply from this point, even when he doesn't technically break 3RR. The community is tiring of him, but that is not an excuse to join him in edit warring. Let the other editors on these articles also take note. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I accept the ban, and admit I was edit warring, although I thought I was justified in doing so, I am now well aware that even with consensus on my side, edit warring is not acceptable. However, I do feel that imposing the ban an hour after the edit warring stopped seems like a punishment rather than to prevent further damage.... You are entirely right that the warring was over very lame details, and that is one reason that I was reluctant to get admins/third opinion involved. However, this sort of editing is kind of my niche, and I tend to perform these simple, minor (usually non-controversial!!) edits to maintain a consistent format, which I believe is important in a portraying a professional image of wikipedia. You may notice that discussions with this user are essentially unproductive, and to be fair, I did enter discussion to explain my edits (although I did continue reverting, which I shouldn't have). Nouse4aname (talk) 10:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

update

well i have to admit it is nice to see someone else get banned for once besides me considering i never did anything wrong. but anything... since im a nice guy and u are a fellow used fan i thought i wud let u go according the used myspace they are already in the studio, which is exciting news especailly since the last update we had was that they wud start recording in june, hopefully this means the will stick to their goal of recording it in a month and have it done b4 the 1 week internation tour, and if so that makes a sept/oct release seem extermly probale. :] USEDfan (talk) 07:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Unblock request

Hello. You recently reviewed and rejected an unblock request by myself with the reason "This request is too long. Please be more concise". Quite frankly I find this attitude rude and entirely unhelpful. Nowhere is there any stated limit on how long an unblock request should be, and thus if I feel I need that much space to explain myself then I will use it. Please explain to me why you decided to decline this request, rather than just leave it for someone else to deal with. Regards Nouse4aname (talk) 08:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Administrators are volunteers. They are not required, and frequently not inclined, to read long and complicated requests. If you request something from an administrator, including an unblock, you will tend to be more successful if you write as briefly and clearly as possible. See also User:Sandstein/Unblock.  Sandstein  08:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps, however surely it would be more fair that if you do not want to read it then you leave it for someone else, rather than declining it without having read it...Nouse4aname (talk) 08:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Possibly. On the other hand, declining it gives you the opportunity to write a briefer and perhaps more successful request.  Sandstein  09:00, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: YouTube Videos

Ok, I won't do anything until a decision has been made. Thanks for the heads up. --Pwnage8 (talk) 17:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

U KNOW

Because you have well over 3000 edits you could apply to become an administrator if you haven't already. --Chrismaster1 (talk) 19:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

...

ur user page says ur gona stop editing, why are u sitll here? USEDfan (talk) 17:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC)