User talk:SarekOfVulcan

Please add new comments in new sections, e.g., by clicking here. Thanks. SarekOfVulcan

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

wb

Hello. You have a new message at User talk:WikiManOne's talk page.

Defamation using unsubstantiated newspaper sources

I discovered your link from editing a wiki page on a friend of mine, Vito Roberto Palazzolo. I don't know if this is the correct medium but I have a big problem with the page, namely, it is hugely slanted and defamatory of Palazzolo, who is a living person. Written by a guy called Don Calo, all his sources are the newspapers and, Silvio Berlusconi included, we know what utter rubbish they print and get away with. I wish to duke this out using informed sources and documantation.

I fear that Don Calo is using Wikipedia as a front, behind which he attacks an innocent man (see the court documents).

Can you help? All Wikipedia had to say was the following:

Please be aware that newspaper articles are presumed accurate unless a correction has been published or there is evidence that the newspaper is biased or unreliable. The decision to declare a newspaper inaccurate can be broached at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:RSN>.

Deletion review for Alice (programming language)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Alice (programming language). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leandrod (talk • contribs) 12:56, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Kramer article discussion

There's a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Sockpuppets_and_legal_threats_at_Edward_E._Kramer you might be interested in. Personally, I'm about tired of dealing with the back and forth on this article. It's really not worth all this effort.--SouthernNights (talk) 02:33, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually, never mind. I'm done with any further edit attempts on this article. I've reverted it to NYlegal1's previous version and if he wants to delete all this information that's an issue for others to deal with. I have no desire to keep going back and forth on this issue.--SouthernNights (talk) 02:50, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Happy SarekOfVulcan's Day!

SarekOfVulcan has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, so I've officially declared today as SarekOfVulcan's Day! For being a great person and awesome Wikipedian, enjoy being the star of the day, SarekOfVulcan! Signed, Neutralhomer A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, click here. Have a Great Day...Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:40, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations and enjoy your day! — Brianhe (talk) 20:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

watchers

Hey, Sarek, how do I find out how many are watching me? --Kenatipo ^speak! 17:26, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

http://toolserver.org/~mzmcbride/watcher/?db=enwiki_p&titles=User+talk%3AKenatipo, but I'm not sure if that's what you're asking. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:29, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Fewer that 30 watchers? That's a little vague. Thanks. --Kenatipo ^speak! 17:37, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

It explains it here. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:54, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Sarek. --Kenatipo ^speak! 23:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

User:Someone65

Just letting you know that he came back as another IP and claimed that you were too involved to block him. I didn't see that, and beyond that he clearly isn't listening to anyone. I therefore extended his block to indefinite. See the ANI thread for more details. –Grondemar 12:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Since you wish to be kept in the loop: I left another message on User talk:Grondemar, as Someone65 is continuing to evade his block through multiple IP's in the same range.--Atlan (talk) 23:43, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

A request

Hi, User:Onetonycousins issued a warning against me for issuing a warning against him for using vulgarity in edit summaries. Here is his vulgarity: [1]. Here is the warning he is responding too [2], with the template saying the wrong stuff so i edited it to [3]. This is supposedly me making threats against him.

Seeing as this is simply a petty "revenge" warning with no basis, can it be removed from my edit history seeing as i have never had a single warning in my entire history in Wikipedia except for once when i gave myself (yes myself) a warning for stopping an edit-warrer by going past 3 reverts to which they finally stopped.

Also does Onetonycousins deserve another block seeing as he is still using vulgarity in his edit summaries? He even had an ANI broiught against him once again, this time by User:Gnevin, for his edit summaries. Link here. Mabuska ^(talk) 13:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

In fact here is yet another outburst from him: Talk:League_of_Ireland_Premier_Division#A_final_solution. Despite the previous warnings and blocks he just doesn't seem to get it. Mabuska ^(talk) 13:48, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

"f**k" isn't particularly WP:CIVIL, but it's not a vulgarity. I've warned him about that last message to you, though. Back off and give him room, please. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I have given him room, i don't stalk or trail him looking to get him into trouble. Its not my fault he decides to jump in head first and make changes with uncivil language without dicsussing - especially in articles i have on my watch list or am currently involved in editing. Should i just inform someone else to issue a warning to him in the future the next time he decides to have a go or just let him go around thinking its alright for him to do so? I can work with him on a professional level if he does likewise in a professional manner as in here Mabuska ^(talk) 14:01, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Just to clarify; my request is not about taking action against Onetonycousins - i only asked does he deserve another block not that he should get another block. If i wanted to request that i'd go to AN/I, which i may do seeing as he has defended his personal attack. Rather my request is about the removal of that pointless revenge warning from my edit history or for that do you go to AN? Mabuska ^(talk) 15:42, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

That warning definitely isn't deletable -- just revert and ignore.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:44, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Okey dokey, and what of OTC's open refusal to withdraw his comments? Mabuska ^(talk) 18:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:ROPE. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:01, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Whilst i know what your getting at with that link, that is in regards to blocked users. Maybe a stern formal warning on personal attacks from an admin such as yourself to OTC may serve as a better rope... as it'll let them know they have a chance and that it won't be tolerated if done again. Especially as they are adament they mean it. Mabuska ^(talk) 22:25, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Aaron_Craft

Hi, I note that you declined a CSD for the above article earlier but I cannot for the life of me see how the guy is notable under the policies for basketball players. I CSD'd this myself, then noticed your earlier decline & so self-revert ... only to find that you had reverted an intermediate attempt to remove the template. I'm confused; I bet you are too! What is the way forward with this please? - Sitush (talk) 20:43, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Just seen your cmt on my talk page. - Sitush (talk) 20:44, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)(thought you might :-) ) There's sufficient sourcing out there to meet the WP:GNG, so it's not speedy material. AfD is fine -- I suspect it won't survive, but I want there to be time to source it properly. (Re: revert -- I think I was confused there myself. :-) ) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Made a comment on the article talk page. Will look into it in a couple of days when, hopefully, it has settled down a bit. Thanks for your assistance. - Sitush (talk) 20:51, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Spliced

Do you really think talking it over on the article talk page will help, when the editor in question clearly doesn't read any form of talk page? (Also, you might want to revert Girloveswaffles' last two edits to the article, which were just blindly undoing mine. Again.) Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 20:48, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

• Also, I've discussed this at least twice on their talk page and they won't listen. Do you really think discussing with them somewhere else will work? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 20:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
  • No, you've warned them on their talkpage. Discuss it on the article talkpage. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:57, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
    • And what makes you think they'll discuss it? This user probably hasn't even seen the talk page, judging from their edit history (3 months and all they've done is restore the same fancruft I keep removing). But if you want to comment there, and maybe on the user's talk page as well, that might help — Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 20:59, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
      • And what makes you think you can ignore WP:DR? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:01, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
        • You can't resolve a dispute if the other party is blatantly unwilling to do anything other than click "undo" ad nauseam. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:02, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
          • ...which sounds much like what you say you're doing. You're not going to win this on my talkpage, you know.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:05, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Simple English Wikipedia

Hello, I noticed that here [4], you referred a user to the Simple English Wikipedia as a suggestion for proving they can work in a collaborative environment. Speaking as a member of the Simple community, we already have a fairly bad reputation for being seen as a "vandal rehab center", and indeed, a number of users banned or blocked from en have been sent over here (and consequently used up a lot of our time). We've actually added the phrase "Simple English Wikipedia is not a place for banned users to try and get unbanned from another website. Simple English Wikipedia is a separate Wikipedia in its own right." to our version of WP:NOT: [5] Are there any alternatives to simply dumping users on other Wikimedia projects? Thanks, Kansan (talk) 00:50, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that -- I was trying to come up with options short of "go away, kid, you're bothering us". --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 01:45, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

(butting in) ... Sarek, you are obviously not from Yorkshire, where bluntness is an art form. I speak as one from the neighbouring Lancashire & so may be biassed in this opinion :) - Sitush (talk) 01:55, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Bangor Air National Guard Base

It's the same facility. When the Air Force inactivated Dow AFB in 1968, the Maine ANG took over the part of the base not turned over to the city of Bangor. Bwmoll3 (talk) 21:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Having a separate page for Dow AFB and one for Bangor ANGB wouldn't take long to accomplish and it's not difficult. I've actually been wanting to update the article on Dow AFB for some time now. Still have a few things to add to it as well. Since the two are physically one and the same, was the reason I put it all under the Bangor ANGB title, then restructured it. The fact also is that I just didn't have a lot of material about the national guard base (the 101st ARW is another project, and another page for another day). However I DID want to separate the ANG base from the Bangor International Airport page. Works for me either way, and would be more than happy to move the Dow information back to the former page. Bwmoll3 (talk) 21:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Will need a few minutes :) take care Bwmoll3 (talk) 21:46, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I put the Bomarcs in the Dow AFB article (restored and updated), and the OTH Radar use by Space Command in the ANG article. Been working on this most of the day and it didn't take long to split it. Bwmoll3 (talk) 22:25, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

A little help, please?

There's a Seventh Day Adventist POV pusher in the Waldensians article (WP:NPOVN discussion about it here), and I'm just about to head out with my family for my birthday. Thanks. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:33, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I see he's backed down, nevermind, but thanks anyway. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:43, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Happy birthday, anyhow. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:16, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion

Noticed you were going through and adding the sanction notice. Not sure if this would be workable or not, but wouldn't it be easier to just add the sanction notice to the WP:Abortion Project's template? Take it or leave it. _WM^O _{Please leave me a wb if you reply} 22:09, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

No, much better to save it for articles where there are actually problems such as edit warring. I only tagged Talk:Abortion itself because it seemed to me that the main article should be tagged, not because there was actually any need for the sanctions there at this point. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:14, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

unblocking of Brianwazere

Hi this brianwazere who u blocked but im currently not logged in, i want to know when my block is up and indefinite is not a good enough answer i want to know how many DAYS OR HOW MANY WEEKS i am blocked for, i would say thanks but im not thankful! BRIANWAZERE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.46.219.31 (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I strongly advise you to reply to me, how dare you ignore me i know u were online lately so reply to avoid more trouble thank you 86.44.231.254 (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

more obvious notice of abortion GS

Sarek, when the Sarah Palin page was under 1RR, if you tried to edit it, a big notice would pop up on the edit page warning you of the 1RR, etc. Can we do the same for some of the contentious abortion pages? --Kenatipo ^speak! 16:19, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Good idea. Remind me later if I don't get to it. Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:32, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I see the GS warning at the tops of some talk pages, but I think there should be something at the tops of the article pages, like those different color locks? Also, a warning when you hit the edit button. Thanks. --Kenatipo ^speak! 18:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

John Goodsall

Have you noticed he's using two accounts to edit his article? Dougweller (talk) 21:47, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

User:The Egyptian Liberal

theres no note on his block to appeal it. also the reason that you blocked pending the bureaucracy figfures out is not reason to block. you cant punish a contributive editor because others are confused. at the most sanction for temporary 1rr, but you cant hinder improvement.Lihaas (talk) 06:27, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't fully understand that post, but it appears to be saying that you were wrong to block. If so, I totally disagree. The editor was causing considerable disruption, and you were right to block. However, I think I have pretty well sorted out the mess, and it is clear from what The Egyptian Liberal has said on their talk page that they will not be likely to continue with the problematic editing, so I think an unblock is in order. Usually I consult the blocking admin, rather than unblock myself. However, in this case, since you said the block was "until we figure out what the heck happened and how to fix it", and I think that is done, I am going to go ahead and unblock. Please let me know if you disagree. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:25, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Not at all. I just wanted to make sure the problems didn't get worse before they were dealt with. That done, there's no further need to maintain the block. I appreciate the note, though. Thanks! --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:23, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

This may interest you

1RR? [6] [7] Lionel (talk) 02:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk:State_of_Mexico#Requested_move_March_2011

Talk:State_of_Mexico#Requested_move_March_2011 hopefully that way finally the state of México gets its accent. Chihuahua State (talk) 07:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Unblock from Macr86

Hello SarekOfVulcan we wanna unblock from Macr86 and you blocked in 43 days ago. 75.142.152.104 (talk) 19:30, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

You can go ahead and post another unblock request on your talkpage, and someone will evaluate it. Just make sure that it addresses the reason you were blocked for this time. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:41, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I put {{ reason=your reason here 75.142.152.104 (talk) 19:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)}} now are you ready SarekOfVulcan? 75.142.152.104 (talk) 19:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

No, because "your reason here" is not an unblock rationale.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

My block

Are you aware that I removed the troublesome wording that you claimed I reverted to between your comments on my talk page and my third edit that you blocked me for?

The three edits were like this:

1. I reword a bunch of stuff in the article, you claim that that counted as my "1RR" because I switched the word "clinics" back to the phrase "health centers" in that edit. You specifically say if I undo that portion of the edit, it would not count as a revert.
2. With no interceding edits, I follow your advise to avoid conflict, and the phrase in question to "facilities" which was previously unused, which I believe satisfied your demand that I undo that specific wording.
3. I make a revert to the page, believing since I satisfied your requirements I was still allowed one revert.

After that, you blocked me... I would like to hear the rationale. _WM^O _{Please leave me a wb if you reply} 04:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)