User talk:PCHS-NJROTC

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

I'm quite busy in real life at times. If you have an important message for me and I don't get back to you here, try leaving me an email. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 20:44, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality tag in Fsck

Hi, you have putted a neutrality tag in the Fsck article that I think is no longer necessary. Please check out this article to see if it is still useful. You can also see the Talk:Fsck to see the reasons why you had put it. Cheers. --Felipebm (talk) 12:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:69.171.160.58

I blocked this "person," and I removed their extremely offensive response to your post there. I read it, blocked the "editor," had some dinner and thought about it, and decided I also had to remove the hate speech. Done. Regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 02:32, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting user talk pages

Hello and good morning. I just wanted to let you know that this revert is controversial. Users are allowed to remove warnings from their talk pages and the revert tool should only be used for clear vandalism. Please refrain from reverting user talk pages when the user has removed content on their own page. Warnings can be seen in the revision history of their page so it is not neccessary that it be visible. Anyway, good luck with your speedy tagging, see ya around.--TParis00ap (talk) 13:39, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck, bro...

That little dingaling has been a serious pain for a long time. I went ahead and blocked the IPs for three months, including the school IP. Please let me know how it goes with the IP report. I can think of at least one serial vandal who needs a "come to Jesus" moment from his IP. Good luck and thanks for the kind words. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:07, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank's, although the school IP is a district wide IP being used by thousands of users and zero visits to WP since the district has WP blocked in the web filters. That means we can't even read it anymore thanks to the trolls. Yeah, thank's bro for dealing with her; now all that's left is for me to write to her ISP; I already got her banned from CenturyLink (used to be Embarq), I guess she can have fun finding ways to vandalize when she's banned from the two broadband providers and can't get on WP from school. :P PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 00:13, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

People like her make me glad my high school days are 30 years behind me. :) You are truly one of the good ones who make this site work so well in the face of boneheads. Thanks for the Barnstar, btw! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:27, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome; and did you get my message about the troll's new IP? These aren't people I know; they're just people I discovered when I started editing here, and they've been vandalizing longer than I've been editing it appears. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 00:32, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see you blocked the IP, thanks. Thanks for the compliments btw. :] PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 00:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just got your message a few minutes ago. Sadly, our airhead cheerleader has been here for quite awhile. She has her own entry on the long-term abuse page. PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:38, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know; I wrote it a year ago. She's been sleeping, and now she's got a straw in her... well, and she's vandalizing again. She ought to be locked up; this is unexcusable. What's scary is that Cricket isn't even in Florida, so one must wonder how the heck she's using it. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 00:46, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I take it back that I don't know these vandals; she once mention the name Sam Lindsay, and if it's her, I'd absolutely love to see her locked up. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 00:50, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When guys get crazy, it's one thing. Crazy girls are an entirely different story. If you can bring it up with the principal on Monday, perhaps you should. PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:52, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Might as well do it now; I don't go to Lemon Bay or Charlotte High, so if I tell them it would be through email. I don't think the Cricket Communications user is a current student though, and perhaps not even an alumni; I'm thinking that it's someone in another state that's just picked up on this whole meatpuppetry thing. It's clearly meatpuppetry as there's a rainbow of IPs and trolling styles I've seen associated with LBHS Cheerleader. It's not just LBHS either; my GF knows all about this as she's forwarded me some bulletons on Myspace posted by some of her friends saying "Wikipedia hates us, we need to teach them a lesson" and crap, and I think she's taken them out of her friends list; she did not participate beyond writing a comment "wow, aren't you mature." The district has already told the staff at the different schools about it, and they've also blocked Wikipedia district wide. One of them from our arch rival school, Charlotte HS in Punta Gorda, wrote "This is what you get for getting us kicked off the internet yesterday" on the Monopoly article (really wise move isn't it; that's right up there with writing "the IT&S people suck" which is the quickest way to get permabanned from the network). PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 02:32, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is truly disheartening. This is such a marvelous resource and a bunch of knuckleheaded teens manage to get a district-wide ban imposed on it. Damn. The meatpuppet/copycat thing doesn't surpise me; there are certainly precidents and two particular ones come to mind. If you do decide to bring this latest nonsense to light at the school, I wish you luck. Please keep me posted because there are few things which bug me quite as much as offsite-coordinated vandalism. Thanks again for all your good work. PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think a solution would be for someone to inform the IT&S about indefinate soft blocks that should keep the vandals from using the school district network for their nonsense without the need to block the site entirely. I had asked the ITS a couple years ago and they indicated that it was because of abuse, and they said it was because of "rules they have to follow" I think what happened is that a bunch of people complained to the local telecom about it thinking they would just forward their complaints, but the company probably said that something had to be done to put a stop to the abuse or they'd cut the service. They didn't specifically say it was because of vandalism, but that part's pretty obvious considering that we're the only district in the state blocking the site; not even Hospital Corporation of America with all of their IT&S web filters and monitoring required by HIPAA blocks out Wikipedia. I'd personally rather see it be a soft block than a hard block (even though if and when I get through an RfA I'd still be able to edit through a hard block as an admin), but I guess that's the district's decision; anything would be better than a total block on the site. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 03:07, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this particular IP is out of New Jersey...wrong end of I-95. :) I for one strongly believe you'd make a fine administrator and it's been eons since I've nominated anyone. I just may do so next week since I still don't have internet access at my new house. Hope to have it then. I'm editing here at work between lulls in the action, which makes it really difficult to sit down and write some new content. PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:39, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that would be great since next week we're only in school for two days due to Thanksgiving. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 03:51, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Banned user edits

I tend to delete any and all edits from banned users, even if they're good. To me, banned is banned. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:38, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded; it's coming off. I'm in the process of filing an abuse report on User:68.52.42.38 PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:40, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not to worry; I already reverted to the last edit prior to the meatpuppet's. :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:42, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You missed some that she posted as an IP (tricky vandal). PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Abuse reports/208.66.198.220

Not sure if there is still anything going on here, but they've been blocked again. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:32, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Realistically, nothings happening with it being a month ago unless they've already been caught without us having to bring it to their attention. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 19:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I have been looking at some of the abuse reports and it seems that rarely, if ever, does an ISP actually do something about Wikipedia vandals. And personally, I don't blame them. If I were running a company, the last thing I would want to do is alienate a paying customer who also might have influence over friends/relatives (especially for something as silly as vandalizing Wikipedia). I would just tell you guys to block him and be done with it. My question is, then, why do you keep filing these reports? Maybe you get results by contacting schools, but contacting personal ISPs like Comcast or Time Warner is probably just a big waste of time. Don't you agree? Thanks. Keegscee (talk) 21:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They do all the time, but if someone that doesn't know what they're doing goes off and sends it incorrectly, they're not going to waste their time trying to figure out what they're talking about. Most ISPs are corporations with numerous departments; the people working the abuse desks don't care about losing a paying customer, they care about their jobs. Customers are numbers to them, and Wikipedia vandals increase the number of people that are being kicked off, therefore increasing the need for them. Centurylink, for example, absolutely cares; I'm pretty sure the an abuse report to the company (then Embarq) was probably the reason this site is blocked at Charlotte County Public Schools, although it wasn't an official report through WP:ABUSE. User:LBHS Cheerleader was also dealt with through abuse reports, and she disappeared for an entire year after being reported. BT took action against someone I reported related to Grawp. User:Mmbabies was taken down through an uncommon abuse report; complaining to the Better Business Bureau took care of him/her even though AT&T wouldn't do anything. Someone once asked me help them dealing with Comcast when they received a personal response because their abuse report was not submitted properly, and I did. Once I sent an abuse report to Road Runner, but although it was processed, they responded that they couldn't do anything because it was too stale (the abuse had not occured for a month as the IP was then blocked), but the dedicated vandal who had previously returned 6 month blocks stopped after that, so I have to wonder if they took action anyway. Furthermore, I've independantly notified abuse desks about "cheerleader vandals" and I think they've taken action. So far, I think I've found Centurylink, Comcast, Road Runner, Cox (I think Cox usually issues warnings though instead of suspensions), Verizon, Level 3 Communications, Shasta Communications, and even AT&T despite their notorious lack of response. ISPs don't want their name to be tarnished due to their lack of response to abuse reports in favor of a hand full of pinheads either. ISPs are usually show more mercy to schools and businesses because they usually have much more expensive plans (once again, corporations don't really care anyway), and they understand that there will always be that ten percent using the shared IPs for malicious purposes, and that explains why sometimes it appears that they didn't take action; in reality the ISPs will usually pass the complaints on to the orgs and inform them that the actions violate their Acceptable Use Policy, and don't think ISPs haven't ever suspended schools or businesses who have been repeat sources of trouble. Such orgs are required to have an abuse plan. It's not because corps care, it's because the people who create their policies care. Households, however, are a dime a dozen and they are shown much less mercy. If ISPs didn't want to do anything about abuse, why would they pay people specifically to get rid of abusers? In addition, why do people always talk about schools but never employers? Schools are not the only organizations who care about abuse. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 23:37, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for launching that investigation into my user page. I really appreciate it. May I suggest that next time you mind your own business? Thanks. Keegscee (talk) 18:25, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was just being bold which is encouraged to every user as soon as someone notices them and leaves them a welcome. I usually don't mess with people's user pages, but before I even saw what wiki you suggested people vandalize, the first thought that crossed my mind when reading your user page was "you've got to be kidding me, and this guy is asking me about abuse reports." For what it's worth, the site could have been a bunch of liberals making fun of conservatives and I still would have brought it to the attention of the admins; we are not 4chan, and we do not ask people to perform malicious actions. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 20:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You weren't being bold, you were being a dick. You brought this issue up here, here, here, here, and here. And these are only the instances that I know of. Fortunately, I don't need to express my opinions of Conservapedia for people to realize what nut jobs they are. Simply providing the link will suffice, and people will come to the same conclusion I did. Keegscee (talk) 21:25, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you confessing to sockpuppetry? My comments at Marek69's talk page had to do with an IP editor posting comments quite similar to your's at Talk:Main Page, although I was not assuming it to be you at the time. You're cruising on a fast track for a block my friend; I now have to wonder if you're engaging in sockpuppetry to avoid scrutiny, and at any rate, calling fellow Wikipedians a "dick" is uncivil and will not help you while admins argue whether or not you deserve to remain unblocked. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 00:48, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha. I didn't realize someone else promoted vandalizing Conservapedia. Maybe they saw some of my warnings and are now joining the cause. Let's be honest: a website like Conservapedia lends itself to vandalism. And if people are vandalizing there instead of Wikipedia, better for us. So get over yourself and get a sense of humor. Stop acting like such a.....such a conservative. Keegscee (talk) 01:09, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not funny, nor would it be funny to promote vandalism at Liberalpedia if such a thing exists. This isn't about politics, this is about Network Abuse. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:25, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your claims of sockpuppetry at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Keegscee. I want to emphasize the part about assuming good faith. I know you deal primarily with vandalism and probably get very frustrated, but that is no reason to abandon a key value of Wikipedia. No matter how good your work is here, it does not entitle you to bypass any of the rules. Please do not think that because you file abuse reports and do some of the dirty work that you can pick and choose what rules you want to follow. I am guilty of this as well and will do my best to improve. Keegscee (talk) 02:51, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do assume good faith, which is why I insisted on a checkuser before anyone jumped to conclusions. Sometimes I feel I assume good faith too much. sockpuppetry crossed my mind the minute I saw that comment in that "who created wiki" thread since it appeared very similar to your commentary, but I assumed good faith and did not want to alienate you unless there was more proof. I started setting up the report for possible sockpuppetry before I received your message stating you were not the IP user who posted at Talk:Main Page. I'm glad to see that you're trying to improve. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 03:06, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:AbActioned

A tag has been placed on Template:AbActioned requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. GrooveDog FOREVER 23:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's so old I didn't even remember creating it. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 23:38, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: your message

Hi PCHS-NJROTC, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 03:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PCHS-NJROTC, I've left you another reply on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 03:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another reply on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 04:10, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello PCHS-NJROTC, Marek69 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. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Marek.69 ^talk 04:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 04:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, PCHS-NJROTC. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:Abuse_response/2009_Revamp.
Message added 02:13, 4 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Netalarmtalk 02:13, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's the new message? PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 02:16, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the future of the project, and I'm personally getting tired of this project now that nothing has happened in a long time. Netalarmtalk 02:30, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've been tired of it because it seems more and more of the reports would be incompatible with the criteria. It seems it's getting better though. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 02:33, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Keegscee

We need some more information if you'd like a checkuser done here - your comments seem to imply that you think Howard isn't a sockpuppet, in which case there's no reason for a check, or even an investigation, to be done. Thank you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:42, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the IP is probably a sockpuppet. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 02:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Grand Theft Jimbo

Thanks for editing that, dude. I bet if we could at least ask some help from the modding community to make a TC should this project of ours turnn into a reality. Blake Gripling (talk) 03:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cooooooool!! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 03:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir

I saw your discussion about the term myth on the creationism discussion article, & I admired your warmth for God...of course you may delete or not reply to this, since it doesn't really concern Wikipedia...but I'm just interested in your view. How is it please that you believe in God and evolution at the same time, I wonder? You said that the Bible didn't say "God piled up everything" but I believe God did do something a bit like it. If you take the Bible literally, I mean, the world would be much younger than evolutionists claim; and theories such as the "Big Bang theory" is not exactly biblical. I was just wondering, because the two views seem so incompatible with each other...If you would be so kind as to write back to me, please write on my talk page! Yours truly, Classical Esther (talk) 12:11, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly believe that God created everything, but I'm neutral on evolution because it doesn't really say how he created it all. I completely believe in the Genesis explaination, and the seven days theory. The "Big Bang" theory could potentially make sense if you think about it; God says "let there be light," and light there is; a "big bang" occurs because God caused it to occur. The Bible says we came from dust/dirt. Microscopic organisms exist in dust/dirt. In Genesis, God first created plants, then fish and birds, then land animals, then "man in his own image" (humans). This order is also what is explained by evolutionists. There's no question as to whether organisms evolve; mutation occurs frequently among bacteria and viruses. I believe, however, that this is because of God's will, not all on its own. I'm neutral on the age of the Earth as the Bible doesn't really say exactly how old our planet is. I don't blindly assume that just because scientists say that this planet is billions of years old that it is fact; Pluto was originally considered a planet in our solar system after all. Carbon dating may be inaccurate if conditions were quite different years ago. God made Eve out of Adam. Scientifically, males cannot phyically give birth, but what if Adam was not actually a male, but rather something quite different capable of asexual reproduction? Could have Eve coming from Adam be the Bible explaining how we evolved from one form to another because of God's intervention? I believe that God designed all of the biology, physics, and natural chemistry of this world and universe; I believe, for example, that all of the scientific laws are so because that is God's will. I believe that although a table could instantly become an F-16 without any scientific explaination if it were God's will, it is not likely to become God's will as God's will is that a table will remain a table, whereas swine flu, human flu, and bird flu can merge and become H1N1 because that is God's will. I do not believe in "luck" or "chance" at all; I believe everything happens for a reason. God created the Earth in a week, whether the Earth literally popped up in a week as understood by humans, was literally designed by God in a human week, a week in God's view, a day was a hundred years and a week was 700, or something else. I'm not big on saying "yes, this is how it happened;" I believe that God created the universe, and although we can speculate, I don't feel we should be surprised if any interpretation should be found wrong; science will never prove the exact process that happened before humans even walked the Earth, whether it be less than a week before human existance or billions of years. There's a lot of gray area; the Bible was written years ago, so it's difficult as to whether to take it literally or how to take it. If you think about it, if the scientific theories are correct including the order of evolution (microscopic organisms ==> algae ==> plants ==> fish ==> birds ==> land animals ==> humans), it would have to be more than a coincidence that the prophets had the same order of creation (plants ==> fish and birds ==> land animals ==> humans). In a nutshell, (in the beginning,) God created the heavens and the earth, one way or the other. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 02:10, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was certainly interesting. Thank you for your kind notice of my question: it was very nice of you to write back. I think rather differently, that the entire Bible is inerrant and literal, and that evolution is something very different. Because the import thing about evolution is that things...well...evolved right?--over millions of years? Well...that's very different from the seven-day creation which the Bible talks of, in my opinion. And evolution claims man comes from monkey. What's the difference? Where does the creation of the soul begin? And most evolutionists think Noah's flood was a 'myth' and just a sort of fairy tale. But ancient people from all over the world have stories of a great flood in common, and the fossils that evolutionists claim must have been created over millions of years might have mostly been made through the flood. There's a fossil, for instance, that shows a fish in the process of swallowing another fish. Scientists say it takes only three seconds for the fish to be swallowed. It's most likely that a sudden, overwhelming force stamped the two fish instantaneously into a fossil - the flood! How can that be compatible with evolution?...It's questions like these that make me feel very dubious of evolution. O, perhaps I'm getting carried away. Anyway it was very kind of you to write back. In any case, whatever views we might have on how the world began, I'm very, very glad you still believe God created the earth and the heavens, and is capable of anything he wishes, which is more than what most people believe. Goodbye! Classical Esther (talk) 06:31, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:AfroUnderscoreStud

Likely Grawp, ScienceGolfFanatic, or even Pickbothmanlol, since he clearly went into discussions regarding his socks. –MuZemike 01:30, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, that's all I needed to know. Keep up the good work. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP spammer

Maybe this could brighten your day, an IP spammer keeps spamming his organization (CABAT Financial Services) Diff and has been blocked 3 times that I mentioned an abuse report will be filed with AT&T if he comes back from his month block and spams again. I figured I should alert you to this since I know you have done this in the past. Momo san ^Gespräch 05:32, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll see what I can do. Perhaps I should try calling AT&T abuse on the phone this time? I do think they've gotten better at responding since the Mmbabies fiasco based on my dealing with them with TCP port scanners. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 16:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well whatever way it gets to them I guess, i'm sure they got flak from that time the BBB got involved so they probably have gotten better at handling abuse cases this time around. Momo san ^Gespräch 16:26, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just called the 800 number only to hear an automated message stating that they don't take abuse reports over the phone. I'm going to go ahead with an email to abuse AT att DOT net and abuse AT sbcglobal DOT net, but I have some real life issues to tend to first, and given the history for that IP, formatting all of the logs will take a while. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 16:55, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks and Merry Christmas ^w^

Thank you very much for doing me the honor of the kind suggestion of being "adopted." I never knew about that and it'll probably be a great help! I'm a beginner at these things and the Internet terrifies me. I'll think about it and tell you if I get "adopted." And in the meantime, have a truly happy Christmas! God bless~! Classical Esther (talk) 07:56, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delicious carbuncle

Hello, if you continued to have problems with User:Delicious carbuncle adding and re-adding posts about you to ANI and continuously requesting bans of you, I urge you to report him for disruption and harrassment. What he is doing is not right and he should be held accountable for his actions. I will do my best to make sure he stops as well. Take Care and Merry Christmas...NeutralHomer • Talk • 02:05, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks NH. Merry Christmas to you as well. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 02:10, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Hi, PCHS-NJROTC! I'm very delighted to tell you I have been adopted by Peterdownunder. Thank you for the happy suggestion. Happy New Year~! Classical Esther (talk) 09:44, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great to hear! You have a Happy New Year as well! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 14:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ACC

I wish to obtain access to the WP:ACC tool. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re Delicious Carbuncle

It really would be for the best if you did not involve yourself in the above editors talkpage unless it is a matter you are already involved in. I can take care of myself, thanks. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I only did that for the sake of clearing it out of the queue of people asking to be unblocked. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You've been asked repeatedly to disengage from Delicious carbuncle. These edits [1] and [2] show you are continuing to abuse of your editing privledges. This is totally unacceptable and is clear harassment. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to be civil, but where does it all stop? He threatens me, he continues to insist on bans, how can I be expected not to submit heated replies now and then? He's harassing me, I can't even pull myself away from WP because I fear DC's got some kind of nonsense started again. He harasses me on Christmas and New Years. He is just plain being rediculous. Yet I try so hard to be civil and polite, I offer him WP:TEA and wish him Merry Chistmas/Happy New Year. I did not start all of this again, DC did with his nonsenscial user subpage. Furthermore, what did I do wrong closing that unblock request? If DC wants to report the admin, he needs to do it at WP:AN/I. I've supported the interaction ban because I'm sick of this abuse. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

None of that explains the two edits ChildofMidnight highlighted. Totally unnecessary. You need to disengage just as much as the other party. Wknight94 ^talk 21:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly you're both at fault, as several editors have noted. He's just been blocked for 10 minutes, and I expect you will be also if you don't drop it. You should have been blocked for the above cited edits.

Sometimes you just have to ignore things. I know it's hard and responding can be tempting, but if things are already going your way (as at the Admin noticboard) adding fuel to the fire isn't constructive. If you leave him alone and he comes after you he will be blocked. If he leaves you alone and you continue to go after him you will be blocked. If you continue to go after each other, I expect you will both be blocked. None of those are useful outcomes. Just take a break or work on something else. If you can't restrain yourself from commenting then don't read or look at what he's up to. Cheers. Good luck. And Happy New Year! ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:09, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree entirely with CoM. You say you agree with calls to disengage, put your money where your mouth is and do it. Just ignore DC, hopefully he will do the same. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 22:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me pile on. If this means what I assume it does, you're dropping it and pretending it never happened, right? "Fault" doesn't matter, but I do hope (and request) you'll leave the drama alone. CoM can probably suggest many pages that need creating. tedder (talk) 22:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was actually trying to get into ACC as you can see, although I wouldn't be opposed to article building. I guess my interest is mostly with the technical behind the seens work because of my interests in information technology. I'll take your advice and build some articles. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 22:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a geek too. I've written more than one or two perl scripts to help me add data to a series of articles. The advantage of article-building is it gets you away from the areas that, frankly, are causing you trouble. tedder (talk) 22:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RfA prefers that one has contributed to articles too, and I hope to eventually become an admin once I feel I'm up to the task (certainly not at present). I say article building and more participation in non-vandalism/troll related discussions (such as AfD, which I've been participating more in lately). RC patrol was always neat because I could revert several vandalism incidents in a short period of time (i.e. back when I could get on here from school I would RC patrol the last two minutes of class and could revert as much as 10 incidents). Vandal fighting is becomeing ugly however; vandals are stalking me on multiple wikis and even finding me on social networks. I'm not opposed to less vandal fighting and more contributions elsewhere, however, I'd rather not volunteer to completely abandon it as I have previously found vandalism without even looking for it. However, for a refreshing break, I have already volunteered to abandon LBHSC issues. I've become less active at WP:ABUSE anyway mainly because I've gotten burned out on it, I wasn't even aware of the changes until long into the revamp. No one ever questioned my activities before, that may be why some see me a drama hungry. Now's a chance to gain more expeience with other elements of the project. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 22:40, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Easy does it

Go get some WP:TEA. I'll make sure you aren't railroaded. You're trying too hard at WP:AN and this will work against you. Jehochman ^Brrr 22:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 22:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

:)Hi Again

Hello, PCHS-NJROTC. Thank you for your kind and encouraging message. I am afraid Delicious Carbuncle was mistaken about my writing: I was neither "playing" nor "pretending", or violating copyright intentionally - indeed, I can honestly say I wrote the larger part of it myself. I consider Wikipedia very seriously indeed. And my sister's email to DC was simply an explanation of the confusion that had ensued from her "joke", which I am certain she will not repeat. However, I am very honored indeed to see you are so kindly concerned for me, and thankful for it. Bye, and happy new year! Classical Esther (talk) 06:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Woohoo! My first barnstar!!

Thanks! And I'm sorry about being uncivil and not assuming good faith in the past. I'm doing my best to change my ways. Keegscee (talk) 04:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 19:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Don't be prejudice

Hi PCHS-NJROTC, please see User talk:174.106.0.122, the anon has agreed upon a version which states; "it is morally wrong and can conflict with the goals of the project", and I have implemented this upon the page. Is this version alright with you? Kindest regards, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 18:06, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thanks for your mediation. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 18:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Guess who just reared "her" ugly head(s)?

If you guessed a certain account which claims to be a high school cheerleader in Florida, you'd be right. See this insanity. I know it's colder than normal down your way, but jeez, you think those idiots would find something more constructive to do with their time. Gotta run; always a pleasure chatting with you! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't get it, but not surprising. I can't get this darn system to send me anything. I'll PM you with one of my direct personal addresses. The one I use here goes to my work address which I rarely check. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:04, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Abuse response/212.219.143.250

I see you are the investigator. I have just blocked this IP for a further 3 months, as silly/rude vandalism started within days of the previus month's block expiring. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection

Got your e-mail...I went ahead and semi-protected Cheerleading for a little while. That should hopefully plug the last hole in the dike. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Range block request

WP:AN/I isn't the right venue for your request. Regular administrators don't have access to the IPs being used by this person. Take it to WP:SPI and get one of the checkusers to sort it out. Also, try not to let them bother, since I'm pretty sure you've given them the reactions they want. AniMate 06:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, but this isn't about any of the registered accounts; this is about abuse from the IP range. I did try to handle it through off-wiki email in order to WP:DENY, but the user I emailed just went on a well deserved wikibreak, and I wasn't sure who else to email about it. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 20:25, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators have no way of knowing IP ranges without a checkuser. You can ask all you want for a range block, but we don't have access to IPs unless the edits are made while logged out. SPIs aren't just about registered accounts, they're about the user controlling the accounts and blocking their access to Wikipedia. Be forewarned, I've filed reports against users on highly dynamic IPs. All the checkuser could do is block the account, since the collateral damage would have been too high for a range block. If you know some of the IPs you can use this tool to see how many users would potentially be blocked. Using just four of the IPs a puppeteer was using, I found over 500,000 users could potentially be blocked so a range block was out and the checkuser didn't offer. Still, this is the best option for dealing with an editor who is harassing you and frankly the only option you really have. AniMate 20:47, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Up to 128 users would be affected by blocking 69.171.160.0/25, and who's to say that any of them have anything useful to contribute. My purpose for proposing the range block had nothing to do with any registered account, but rather contributions coming from IPs such as 69.171.160.8, 69.171.160.21, 69.171.160.58, and 69.171.160.104. Abuse reports have not worked, and if any of the 128 users that would be affected have anything useful to contribute, they can request unblock, although I recommend having them have their ISP contact an administrator in that case. Employees of Best Buy would be unable to contribute because the entire Best Buy range is hardblocked due to the untracability of their customers, so I have no sympathy for 128 users of an uncooperative ISP. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk to a checkuser and file a report. I can't think of any admin who would do a range block without concrete technical evidence backed up by a checkuser. Just complaining isn't going to get any results. AniMate 21:32, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/John254. I don't know if the IP is related to this troll or not, but I think you're missing my point. I originally started the thread at WP:AN/I because of actions from logged out, unregistered users editing from IPs in that range. Since they didn't use accounts, there's no need for a checkuser, although if it turns out that any of John254/User:LBHS Cheerleader's vandalism from registered accounts originated from that range, then it's just more evidence in support of a range block. Furthermore, the examples aren't the only IPs in the range involved, but I wanted to avoid writing a textbook chapter (that would never be read) about the vandal. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:40, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of PCS Revenue Control Systems

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is PCS Revenue Control Systems. 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 Wikipedia:Notability and "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(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PCS Revenue Control Systems. 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.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Port Charlotte High School

Hi there.I was studying the Port Charlotte High School article and I noticed you were the main editor of the article. I edit high schools almost exclusively and would really like to help improve this article. I have a few suggestions and questions. I was wondering if you were going to expand the athletics section since there is almost no information about the athletics department. Also, nearly every school of this size offers golf, yet I didn't see it listed on the page. Finally, I could create a state championships table for this article if I knew of all the state championships the school has won. If you know where I could find a list, I would for sure make a table for you. Any comments or suggestions? --JHawk88 (talk) 12:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Golf is indeed offered, I must have somehow left it off when adding the list of sports, or perhaps the source I failed to include it for whatever reason. I'm sure there must be a list of championships won somewhere, perhaps you would be able to find it, or maybe I could ask the principal. If you have any ideas, be bold and contribute! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:57, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

What a pleasure it was to log on this morning and see not one but two Barnstars! Thank you very, very much for the one you left for me. I'd tried a wikibreak for a couple of weeks and I'm still fairly inactive, but it was no less a pleasure to see your thoughtful gesture. Glad you thought of me. :) Here's hoping that the semi-literate little demon spawns from Lemon Bay have gotten the message at last. If not, you know that I have your back. Good luck in school and enjoy your weekend. Regards, --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PMDrive1061 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

You're welcome, and thanks for the cookie! Thanks for helping me deal with the vandals too! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:33, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What a bunch of punks.

Tell you what: I will personally take the initiative and block that range, "collateral damage" be damned. If there's one thing I cannot stand, it's a coward hiding behind a computer keyboard. They're gone in just a moment. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you so much! As I had pointed out at WP:AN/I, the collateral damage would likely be less than that at the average school based on a tool I was instructed to run. I recommend you leave a rangeblock message stating "please have your ISP contact me or a Wikipedia administrator to have this block lifted" as I had recommended at AN/I. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:51, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All set. I blocked the 0 to 16 range for one year which should take care of most of their addresses. To be safe and to avoid some collateral damage, I did allow the creation of new accounts. Anyone trying to log on via the range will be instructed to create a new account. If any new sockpuppet accounts appear, let me know and I'll change the block. Gotta boogie. Don't let these little bastards grind you down. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:53, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:54, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oversight

In future if anyone posts information that is an attack or outing, contact the Oversight volunteers who can suppress that edit. I've already done so for four edits that linked to the blog. Fences&Windows 15:31, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:PcsRcsLogo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PcsRcsLogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Cirt (talk) 20:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to William F Buckley

Please do not arbitrarily edit pages when you know not what you are talking about. Anyone who is in the know knows it was the 1968 democratic Convention when the legendary Vidal/Buckley feud took place. Either your edit was vandalism or severe ignorance Sayyed al afghani (talk) 21:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't have put it so harshly, but the feud did take place at the Democratic National Convention. Keegscee (talk) 00:29, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archives