Jump to content

User talk:Hersfold

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Reading mad (talk | contribs) at 17:33, 25 April 2011. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

ATTENTION: One or more IPBE flags are up for review at this time. Please confirm that all flags listed on this page are still necessary. Thank you!
Welcome to my Talk Page!

Thank you for coming by, however please note that I have largely retired from Wikipedia. Messages left here will not receive a prompt response, if ever. Please also note that I no longer hold any access rights; if you are contacting me in relation to a block, deletion, or any other administrative action I have taken, I am unable to assist you. Please contact another administrator for help.

If you do have an urgent need to contact me specifically, such as for one of my bots, please send me an email via Special:Emailuser/Hersfold.

User:Hersfold/Talk Header - v • e


Re: New Article

Hello Hersfold, I understand the reasons for previously deleting the article on APRICO Solutions and have been revising the content. Can you advise the best way to get this reviewed prior to posting?

Re: Question

Is there some reason you're creating additional accounts? Hersfold (t/a/c) 04:25, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What? Additional accounts? The last username left was taken (talk) 07:31, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, User:(Abuse of our Username policy) was created from your computer a few days ago. Wikipedia's policies don't allow users to operate more than one account except in very narrowly defined cases. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to what, CheckUser? The last username left was taken (talk) 12:55, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello , The last username left was taken; I am not a checkuser but, the Checkuser you are addressing here left This link on your talk page to the policy page that explains the use of multiple accounts. Cheers. Mlpearc powwow 15:05, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware of the multiple account policy. However, I was confused about the existence of the account. The last username left was taken (talk) 22:38, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, according to technical evidence from checkuser. I'll ask again; why are you creating multiple accounts? Hersfold (t/a/c) 15:36, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Several of the IP addresses that I edit from are shared between multiple people, it's possible that one of them created it. The last username left was taken (talk) 22:38, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This was created from your computer; not just your IP address. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. Checkuser only determines IP addresses, so I don't see how you can assert that it was my computer anyway. The last username left was taken (talk) 12:46, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Without getting in to technical detail, you're incorrect about what a checkuser check does. If Hersfold says it came from your computer, it did. Shell babelfish 12:49, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see, a matching user-agent and XFF as well? All of these were the same? The last username left was taken (talk) 12:54, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. This is what we call a  Confirmed result. Now I'm losing patience. Why are there additional accounts coming from your computer. Your evasiveness is making me extremely suspicious. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:07, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again The last username left was taken, Checkusers are "expected" to monitor, seek out and investigate situations just like this. Just a FYI it would be in your best interest to comply and answer all query's addressed to you by Hersfold and any other Checkuser for that matter. Mlpearc powwow 16:44, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudo-unblock request

See User talk:Bsadowski1. This user is requesting an unblock, arguing that he shares an IP with some other individuals. I note that the contributions of this user seem to be OK. Was there further evidence from CU results (like UA) that conclusively showed that this was the same user? I'm not contesting your block I'm just asking you to take a look at it again; I'm well aware you are privy to much more information than I am here; I'm just passing the note along. Thanks, Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 06:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very certain. User:Those Kids is one of almost a dozen accounts all running from the same IP address with the same unusual useragent. If they want to be unblocked, he'll need to email the unblock or functionaries lists, and stop evading his block with other IP addresses (which I've already told him to do). Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:15, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not a proxy

  • Hello Hersfold... FYI on User talk:LS C HIST, please take note that User:218.188.3.66 is a not a proxy. Using a third-party program, I've been able to traced the IP's visit to several sites in Hong Kong (including a prominent Uni), several of which are all related to the school the kid is thought to be studying in (institution name hereby withheld for security reasons) and had made several passing comments about his/her school from as far back as in 2003 and 2006. Another thing, I'm not sure if I should raise this now but does User:Instantnood and User:ColourWolf ring a bell? Like I said, I'm not sure so don't shoot me if I got my hunch wrong. Best. --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 19:06, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • BTW, User:Scania N113 is thought to be a throw-away SPA of his as he pretended not to know anything about Scania N113 while deliberately asking an Administrator a legit question → here ←. I think this is now a no brainer, eh? Best. --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 20:00, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • I wasn't 100% certain about the IP; for some reason it looked kinda suspicious to me (although I can't remember why now). The Scania account was weird, I wouldn't call it a SPA because it does have some other edits later on, and it's rather well-used for a throw-away account. :-/ Either way, he's not the best socker, as claiming you know nothing about an account when they repeatedly show up on your IP address AND share the same interests is rather fail. As for Instantnood and ColourWolf, what exactly is causing your bell to ring? As they were banned back in 2007, there's not much I can do with them checkuser-wise. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:15, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you think there is a concern, then go ahead and list them on Possibly Unfree Files, as I can see you've done for at least one. However, I'm not so sure this is a big issue aside from the simple matter of duplication; as he created the files based on a blank map that I'm pretty sure is either PD or CC/GFDL multilicensed, he's ok as long as they remain multilicensed (in the latter case only, in the former he can declare whatever he wants on it). The maps are available on Commons somewhere, just search for "blank world map". Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:08, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Wasn't me. Not my style. I'm a Wikipedian. The Transhumanist    03:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I got your email, sorry for not replying. Thanks for the response, we've since closed the case. Hersfold (t/a/c) 15:38, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

Response

Any chance you can point me in the right direction then (re: your response below)? Is there another template I need for my situation and what is "clear"? Thanks. 75.55.215.5 (talk) 00:27, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason: "You're not editing from that IP address, so it's irrelevant, but it's also clear. Please only use this template for requesting unblocks. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:24, 2 November 2010 (UTC)"
I replied to your question - that IP address isn't blocked, which is what I meant by "clear". As for checking to see whether or not something is blocked, you can look up the address here or simply try to edit from it. I'm not sure what you're after, aside from that. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:34, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hello, thank you for providing feedback at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pricer1980, and I had a follow-up question in regard to the accounts' underlying IP addresses. It can be seen here. Erik (talk | contribs) 13:53, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia DC Meetup 13

You are invited to Wikipedia DC Meetup #13 on Wednesday, November 17, from 7 to 9 pm, location to be determined (but near a Metro station in DC).

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can join the mailing list.

You can remove your name from future notifications of Washington DC Meetups by editing this page: Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List.
BrownBot (talk) 13:42, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection

Cresix (talk · contribs) requested protection at RFPP for the article Alexis Jordan (singer), this is complety unnecessary since I've already added sources. So I request unprotection since it is not justified now. TbhotchTalk C. 04:23, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:56, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: (User talk:ais523) Javascript update

Your code would have worked, but the script was getting long and unmaintainable, so it's probably better for me to rewrite it rather than just add even more cases. I've refactored it so that new cases will be easy to add in future; it now also looks at the page's built-in JavaScript variables to see which server it's on, and aims the links there. (Thus, it won't now highlight links from the insecure to secure server, or vice versa, but will now work on any Wikimedia wiki, not just enwiki.) Thanks for bringing this to my attention! --ais523 15:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah, very clever. And it looks like it's working. Thanks! Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:51, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

Deleted Article

Hi,

How are you? I am having a problem which you have half corrected. I made a defamatory article about a colleague of mine at work which was not supposed to go live.

You have however found the article and removed it. Which I am VERY thankful for.

My problem is that the old text still appears on Google when you search for either his name, or the title of the article on Google.

I was wandering if either yourself, or another person would be able to remove any traces whatsoever from Google (and any other search engines) so I can forget this whole debacle ever happened.

[I've removed the link to avoid further publicizing the deleted article. Of course it's available in the page history. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)][reply]

and you can see the old text in the article here:

[Again, I've deleted this link, which given the way Google works, would actually raise the pagerank of the article. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)][reply]

Further to my initial problem, I forgot the password for the old user name (Beaver1000000), so I have made a new account which I am using now.

Any help or advice would be very much appreciated.

Thanks

Beaver2000000

Deleting the page is about as much as I can do in this regard; in general, if you don't want something to be posted, you should not be typing it into the edit box on Wikipedia, or indeed on any website. You're somewhat lucky I didn't block you for that article. In any event, if it's still in Google's cache, then in order to get the page removed you'll need to ask them to remove it; this page should help with that. As Brad pointed out above, you should also stop linking to and referring to the article entirely, as further links or mentions will simply make the page easier to locate. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:16, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I have learnt my lesson the hard way and will not be entering anything that should not be on the internet on Wikipedia or any other site again.

I clicked onto the page that you suggested that could remove the content from the Google cache; it suggests that I contact the sites Webmaster to gain approval for the removal of any last traces on Google.

Would you be able to advise me of the next step in regards to communicating with the web master (if possible), or do i write straight to Google stating that the page has already been removed and please dont crawl it in future?

I do thank you for not blocking me, I understand what I have done wrong and will be sure not to do it again.

Thanks

We don't really have a webmaster in the traditional sense; since the page has been deleted here (which really is all Google is after anyway), you're welcome to submit the form asking them to remove it from their listings. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:29, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Checkuser

Hey, could you look over User talk:ArtieWater and User talk:Arthur Water and see if the users need a CU? Thanks! Also please check your e-mail, I'll send you one about this. --Addihockey10e-mail 05:39, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. I think a checkuser here would be unnecessary - the email you sent me appears to be an open admission that these accounts are controlled if not by the same person, at least from the same computer, which is all I'll be able to tell with CU anyway. It looks like this passes the duck test to me. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:51, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

Edit notice

Would it be okay if I copied your edit notice. I'm cool if you don't want to! But I just wnt to scare away vandals! Smiley4541 (Click to Talk) 00:55, November 16, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it's fine... just change the picture. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:53, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BAGBot: Your bot request HersfoldCiteBot

Someone has marked Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/HersfoldCiteBot as needing your input. Please visit that page to reply to the requests. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 03:51, 17 November 2010 (UTC) To opt out of these notifications, place {{bots|optout=operatorassistanceneeded}} anywhere on this page.[reply]

Question

Hi Hersfold - I noticed this and I wondering if there is something wrong with the block notice or if I used the wrong one. Let me know. Thanks.  7  07:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I realized afterward that I'd misread things; since the block allowed him to make a new account (which he eventually did anyway) there really isn't a need for the unblock-un template. What you did was just fine and made things a lot easier, I just misunderstood stuff. Comes from doing three things at once, I think. Hersfold (t/a/c) 08:28, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Phew, thanks. I think the goal of the unblock template in the promosofter block is in case the user is trying to argue that their name is not promotional and/or not a company name. I agree that unblock-un isn't needed in that one because they can create a new username themselves. Regards.  7  09:00, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted page

Dear Hersfold, I'm here asking for a deleted page. Its name was リサルト (in japanese, there's an italian and english version named Risalto)...the problem is that i put it in the wrong wikipedia (the english one). Then i discovered that i cannot use my account on other country's wikipedias...I managed to create an english and an italian one...why can i create in those country and not in japan? I'd like to translate some pages also in French, German, Thai, Chinese and some other languages...how could i do that? thank you for the help. Teoporta (talk) 10:01, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've found the deleted version of リサルト - if you enable your email in Special:Preferences, I can email you with the most recent version of the article.
You should be able to use the same account on multiple projects. Make sure that the accounts you've created on the English, Italian, and Japanese Wikipedias all share the same name and password, then see WP:SUL for more information on how to unify those accounts.
For more information about translation projects, see WP:TRANSL. I'm afraid I'm not really the best to ask about that. I hope all of this helps - let me know when you've enabled your email. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:04, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

{{Infobox musician awards}}

Hello Hersfold, remember me? Well I have come here with a particularly difficult request. The above template lists all teh awards received by a musician during his/her tenure. However, the template is exceedingly long, and most of the times contricts the award tables of the articles where it is present. So, since you are good with HTML coding, can you pleas add a collapsible feature on the template like "collapsed = yes" or something like that so that an editor can click on "show" and see the awards. Regards — Legolas (talk2me) 09:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can, it's not very hard; to do this, all that is needed is to replace class="infobox" in the very first line with class="infobox collapsible collapsed", and then tweak the headers around so the [show] link doesn't pop up in a weird place. This diff [1] shows all the changes needed. I haven't done this on the live template, yet, however, as this would be a fairly major change to simply do. Was there a discussion for this anywhere? A change like this could easily change the layout of any page it appears on. Also, the infobox being inaccurate doesn't seem like a reason to make a change to the infobox, rather it seems like a reason to update the information it contains. I'm rather hesitant about adding this edit until there seems to be some sort of consensus for it. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:27, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply Hersfold. Yes, there is a discussion going on, as soon as a consensus is reached for this, I will let you know to make the changes. — Legolas (talk2me) 03:30, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HAPPY HOLIDAYS

Holiday Card from Mlpearc
HAPPY HOLIDAYS !
Wishing you and yours a very peaceful and joyous holiday season


Mlpearc
Ambience

Thanks! Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since your the second person to in-case the card I know how to post them in the future,lol thanks. Mlpearc powwow 20:04, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas mottos

The motto idea for those between 25th December and mid January needs consensus dtermined on what should be used for which day or even whether the whole idea should be scrapped or postponed. Please help by discussion and determining consensus at WT:Motto of the day/Nominations#Christmas series and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/Specials. Simply south (talk) 22:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Open proxy user

Would you take a look at this user's talk page and, as requested, have a talk with the Iranian administrator? I think he's uncomfortable talking in English, and I don't know how to check for an open proxy. Thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:34, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can ask Mardetanha to help translate, but until he's no longer editing from a proxy there isn't much to be done. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

F. Simon Grant vs Tao2911

I just thought I'd mention I think you were a little hasty/high-handed in taking Tao2911's side against F. Simon Grant. I can see why you thought F. Simon Grant deserved to be blocked, but I might argue that Tao2911 actually provoked the fight (it could be they both deserved to be blocked). Tao2911 lead off accusing Grant of posting "nonsense" (when it was actually pretty reasonable), Tao2911 kept repeating obvious things about how references are important, and yet kept ignoring any references we pointed him at, and so on. It's certainly too bad that Grant took Tao2911's bait, but now the result is I'm stuck working with a troll, and one of the guys who was actually willing to do the hard work of tracking down references has been driven off. -- Doom (talk) 23:05, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I don't take "sides". I extended Grant's block because he was evading it for the purposes of continuing his harassment. Regardless of whatever provoked it, conduct such as that is unacceptable. If he was willing to put as much effort into making a sincere unblock request as he seems to put into his constructive work, I may have considered things, but as it is, certainly not. I'm sorry if this seems "high-handed" to you, but that's how things work. If you're having difficultly with another user, there are appropriate channels to get that addressed; this is not one of them. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Once again: I did not say I couldn't see why you blocked Grant. I might object to your interpretation of his unblock request as lacking sincerity... it is true he was all over the map, but lack of sincerity was not the problem (I would suggest "excessive honesty"). The issue that I'm raising, however, is that I think that both you and Grant have been manipulated by someone who is having entirely too much fun gaming the system. -- Doom (talk) 00:11, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Then, as I said, take that up in the proper channels. When I'm reviewing an unblock request, I'm there to consider the actions of whoever it was who got blocked. I didn't look at Tao's actions at all. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just out of curiosity, what exactly would these "proper channels" be? (I thought it was funny that you "suspected the motives" of my SPI request... the motives are exactly as I stated here. There's something wrong with them?) -- Doom (talk) 18:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your comment, Hersfold, on the sock investigation Doom instigated, that he had commented here, so I just checked it out. I'll say in brief that I didn't pick any kind of fight whatsoever, with Doom or Grant; I just brought up what I considered important points, and repeatedly refused to get sucked into the fights or digressions they were both trying to start, in a peculiar tandem - and once again, reading these comments by Doom raises deep suspicions that Doom is a sock or meat-puppet, or alias of the same user, called F Simon Grant among other things. I've found this whole episode bizarre. They make the same claims, argue the same points, and make the same accusations against me using extremely similar language (that for instance I am "having fun" manipulating or "gaming the system." Grant repeatedly used these same phrases, for me, and weirdly, for himself.) In fact, I said something to Grant early on, and Doom responded, making me think he'd gotten his alias' confused. And Grant certainly plainly wished to "game the system", getting himself blocked in the process. Maybe you might run a check - Grant used two different IP's, and I think both have been blocked. Also, after being very active at the same time Grant was, for weeks or months, Doom was suddenly inactive for a number of days after Grant(plus alias' and 2 IPs) was blocked. He just now resurfaced. Also, Doom's tone is eerily familiar, like Grant trying to really keep a lid on himself, but with the same insistence on "sincerity", "hard work", etc. Frankly, I'm increasingly convinced it's the same person. Maybe you can find something there, if you care to check talk at Beat Gen. and even Grant's AND Doom's comments on my talk (Archive two)...thanks for your balanced review of the matter so far.Tao2911 (talk) 06:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hersfold, I'm sorry to dump all this on you. I filed a sock investigation request about Doom/Grant a couple weeks back, but didn't look that deeply into it myself. It was dismissed without much inquiry, and I didn't feel need to push it then. Just now, I was just cursorily scanning the Beat page talk, Doom's talk, and Grant's, and it is virtually the same voice when read en masse. Same issues, same diatribes, same pet peeves, same phrases. Same person, I think. I think Doom's activity is now spotty because he's had two IP's blocked and it's trouble to get to that third one. Pure conjecture however. Any recommendations how to proceed? And would you mind looking into it? I'm no admin, and you are familiar with the case already. I'd appreciate you giving your assessment. Cheers.Tao2911 (talk) 07:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grant used IP 134.224.220.1 to avoid two bans. I checked and this IP does not appear to be blocked (an oversight by the investigator who blocked Grant and other IP/ID's?) Maybe Doom's IP?Tao2911 (talk) 07:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide all of this in a new SPI if you'd like a check done. I'm not going to conduct a check based off of evidence provided here, as it's harder to track down the discussion should anything ever be questioned. Before you do so, however, please also take a step back and try to look at this objectively; do you see a relation, or do you just want to see a relation between these users? That's the concern I had with Doom's filing, and to be honest I'm slightly concerned here too. I'm not likely to do a check myself, either, as I've ended up becoming a little too involved in all of this. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
understood. I had this suspicion earlier due to just one comment but didn't look further, dropped it; then it came back, stronger than ever, largely due to Doom's comments to you, as described above. I don't really care one way or the other - but simply felt like I just saw the whole picture a bit more clearly suddenly. The more I looked, the more evidence I found (check out Doom's profile page - thousands of words, mostly critiquing Wikipedia - then read Grant's rants on the Beat Gen talk page - eerily similar, with Grant just being more Id to Doom's Ego). Doom is inactive right now, so I won't pursue unless a problem arises. A dif page will connect the dots if needed. Thanks for responding.Tao2911 (talk) 19:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ACC

Hi Hersfold - was this for me or for the account requestor? Thanks.  7  02:26, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, heh. That was for the requester, sorry - I was just a bit bewildered by the comment they made. What you did was just fine. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. No worries.  7  22:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 November 2010


Deleted Palda Records Article

I cant believe you deleted Palda records. You dismissed it as if it were a musical artist. That is incorrect. It was a record label. record labels and recording artists are totally different entities. You are therefore wholly incorrect in your assessment. There are already numerous entires on wikipedia of artists who had releases on that label yes you deleted the entry describing said record label. The deletion is not just specious, it looks like you were completely careless. Please put it back. Josefritz (talk) 15:45, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Jose. I clicked to the Palda Records page from Eddie Burns, and didn't see anything. It came up recently in a discussion of early Philadelphia record companies and the Mummer's Parade. A bummer it is gone. I'm often really surprised at what gets deleted. Bear (talk) 18:09, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore the article. You deleted the entire record of an independent record label that released singles by The Blind Boys of Alabama, the Four Aces, and a large number of Mummers bands including the the Ferko String Band! This is very important history to Philadelphians! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.38.106 (talk • contribs)

Seconded. By whose estimation is Palda "not noteworthy"? They were a very significant label and are collectible. That's noteworthy! veghead (talk) 15:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
@Hersfold:You are the party in total control here, so there's no need to be defensive. The time that has elapsed is irrelevant as deletion can happen at any time. Until recently I was not aware of the Deletionist problem on Wikipedia. I now know that adding anything requires constant surveillance in perpetuity to prevent deletion. For that reason, this will probably be my last contribution. to that point, I created something and you destroyed it. that appears to be the typical give and take with every dogmatic Deletionist. You made a mistake in your haste. I am asking you to fix it. This is where any normal prudent person would apologize and correct it. Personally I don't think Deletionists are normal or prudent. So, show me that I'm wrong. Josefritz (talk) 14:01, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hersfold's Responses

@Josefritz: Sorry I didn't reply to this sooner, I missed it, but you do realize I deleted this page in 2008, right? If you feel this is notable and can provide sufficient references for it, you're welcome to recreate the article.

@Everyone: What appears to be four separate users asking me about the same two-and-a-half-year-old article at roughly the same time is extremely suspect and strains the bounds of my good faith. I will be filing a sockpuppetry investigation for the lot of you. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:05, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hersfold. I, Mr Fritz and the other users are all friends who work at the same place. We wrote this from work. By all means complain to our boss about us misusing company machines during the day if it makes you happy. However, that is what we did when Mr Fritz told us of his bad experiences with Wikipedia. As supporters (financially as well as in spirit) of Wikipedia, we defended Wikipedia. When we saw the case study about which he was complaining, we were shocked that anyone (ie you) could be such a vandal as to delete such a clearly valid article. I still am. As we are working in the same place, we appear to come from the same IP address, because we are behind a NAT address like that vast majority of people on the Internet these days. Assuming that people with the same IP address are the same person is, in 2010, the act of a moron.
If you wish to make sockpuppet allegations, please do, but be warned: if you had done any research at all (like examining and comparing our histories) before resorting to threats, you would have held back: you are wrong. We are different people. So, you have a choice:
  • Continue along your anti-social, threatening path and maintain we are one person sock-puppeting. I can't speak for my colleagues, but I can tell you I am quite tenacious when I've been abused, for example in the way that you have.
  • Get a clue and realise you are out of order on this one, then maybe talk to us with out trying to rattle your limp sabre of wikipedianess at us. No-one will be impressed.
We have a genuine gripe. We also hold similar views about many things; "deletionism" is just one.
Play nice! veghead (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Your use of the phrase "the lot of you" tends to injure your case :) veghead (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doing it by the book

Re [2] - it was clearly a no-brainer, but there's always someone who'll get uppity if they see admins "breaking the rules" ;-)  —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 21:08, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Meh - in those cases I think IAR and common sense apply. But yeah, I can understand. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Antonellicollege/Brexx

Can you comment on whether he is still using IPs that bounce all over the globe? If so, do you have any clues as to how? The last set I caught him one were neither open proxies nor tor nodes.—Kww(talk) 21:17, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a number of the IPs being used were from different countries. Several were positively identified as open proxies; as for the others, they might have just been configured better. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:18, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

Thanks for talking with me. Couch on his Head and Smiling (talk) 01:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ACC

We could use a checkuser on there right about now. Two checkuser-deferred requests ([3], [4]) have been sitting there for just as many days. --Dylan620 (t • c • r) 15:14, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alison took care of them.  7  02:32, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Biographical information policy proposal

I have proposed a change in policy at [[WT:BLP#Do we need a WP:BILP policy?]], it should explain what my motivation was. Also sent to some other people: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. <( User:Couch on his Head and Smiling (talk) )> 06:50, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

Talkback

Hello, Hersfold. You have new messages at Ronhjones's talk page.
Message added 01:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Deleted Page: ManhattanGMAT/ Request for Undeletion

Hello Hersfold,

I wanted to inquire as to the possibility of overturning the deletion of the ManhattanGMAT page. I will be very upfront and say that I am an employee of the company and while I am an avid user of Wikipedia, I am sadly not an avid contributor so I am a bit new to all of this. I am really trying to go through all of the proper procedures for requesting that a deleted article be reinstated. If I make any breaches in procedure, please let me know and I will do my best to correct them. Based on my research it seems that the first step is to contact the deleting administrator, and it appears in the deletion history that you were the deleting administrator.

As your requested above, any deletion discussion should reference the outcome of that articles for deletion page and refute it, and I will try to do so. It seems that the comments for deletion boil down to two main points: 1.) that the page had minimal third party citation (thus causing a lack of notability) and 2.) that the page was promotional in nature. With regards to point one, three articles are linked to the original page. Of those articles, one is from the Washington Post, and one is from the New York Times, admittedly, the article linking to the small business award is dead, and that award is unknown to me. Of the two remaining articles, one (the New York Times article) discusses our founder and how the company began and the other (the Washington Post) discusses our growth in the industry. These articles are both in extremely notable publications and both point out our firm place in the test preparation market. The articles for deletion note "Extensive news searches have found no significant coverage of this organization." Perhaps at that time this was true, but I believe we have a relatively firm presence now. Along with the two aforementioned articles, some examples include:

-http://businessmajors.about.com/od/satgmatpreparation/a/ManhattanInt.htm

-http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/content/may2007/bs20070522_855049_page_2.htm

We also are widely discussed on various test preparation and grad school preparation websites such as GMAT club and Beat The GMAT. While these aren't established news organizations, they are third party locations where we are clearly notable.

In reference to the second point (that we are overly promotional), I understand where that criticism comes from. There are a few sections of the page that discuss us in a detail that paints us in an overly positive light. I would be happy to edit the page to be less promotional, but I do believe the core of that article is reasonable, discussing our place in the industry and the defining factors of our business.

Perhaps our biggest confusion is that seemingly every other test preparation company in our industry, even less notable companies, has a Wikipedia page. For instance, Manhattan Review is widely known as a company that specializes in trading off our notability to draw clients by having a similar name, but they have a page, and one with only one outside citation. Knewton Prep also has a page, but is much newer and less established entity than our company. From our point of view we feel a bit like the only company in our field without a page despite the fact that we are the third biggest company in the industry and one of the most respected. We don't intend to have a promotional page, we just want a place beside our rivals in an apples-to-apples comparison.

I don't anticipate an immediate reversal of deletion (although that would be great), but I would love some guidance on how I can work with you to make our page acceptable. I am an avid user of Wikipedia and I was shocked to see that we didn't have a page especially with so many other smaller companies (in the same exact field) garnering pages on the site. I appreciate your help in this matter and again, if there are any protocols I am not following, please let me know. I don't intend to make any demands here, I just truly believe I am in the right and as such feel that through hard work I can prove my company's notability. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to hearing back from you.

ImTheBombardier (talk) 00:10, 9 December 2010 (UTC)ImTheBombardier[reply]

Hello ImTheBombadier. Unfortunately, due to the reason for which this page was deleted, I am not able to restore it to the article space of my own accord. This page was deleted as the result of an "articles for deletion" discussion that took place over a year ago on the grounds that it was promotional and lacked sufficient references from third parties to justify your company's notability. Companies are not granted articles in Wikipedia simply because their competitors have articles.
However, there is good news. It looks as though the original creator of the article saved a copy of it before it was deleted on their userpage. While they haven't edited for over a year, the article is still there: User:Jrp3d. You are welcome to work on this article and bring it up to an acceptable standard, and if you'd like I can move it to your userpage or a subpage of it so it's easier for you to get to.
I will admit that I am concerned about your conflict of interest. While I appreciate you admitting outright that you are an employee of this company, and while it does seem you have put a fair amount of research into our policies and such (which is more than I can say for most new users), the conflict is still present, and care should be taken when working on this article to ensure you aren't being unintentionally biased. Soliciting comments from other users should help in this matter. From what you've said above, I think it will be a significantly smaller concern than it is with most users with a conflict of interest, however it is still something to be aware of and cautious of.
Anyway, let me know if you want the existing page moved, and I can take care of that for you. If you need any further help with working on the article, I can try to do that as well, or refer you to other pages or other users that have more experience in article work than myself. Hope this helps, and welcome to Wikipedia. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Hersfold. Thank you for the prompt response. I would appreciate it if you could move the page to my userpage (or subpage, I'm not exactly clear on the distinction yet) so that I can work on it. I understand that our competitors pages don't justify ours, but it convinced me that we were doing something wrong in terms of the page we had because I know we are at least as notable as some of those companies. Due to our competitors existence, my inclination is that our notability is less of an issue than the tone of promotion on our page me think that the promotion-like language on our page.
Thanks for expression your concern about conflict of interest. My initial plan is to work only by excision to avoid adding any biased language. To address the notability problem I will add the links I mentioned in my post on your talk page, and to deal with promotional language I will cut out things in the existing page, but add nothing of my own. I appreciate your help and I look forward to working on the page. One question I have is how I go about posting the fixed page and asking for help from other users, I am worried that reposting will immediately be met with speedy deletion. I suppose I can cross that bridge when I come to it but any advice would be appreciated. ImTheBombardier (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved the draft over to the userpage, so you should be able to find it more easily now. It sounds like your intended approach is a good one; if you should need help, or you think you've gotten it to the point it can be moved back into the article "mainspace", then let me know with a message here or leave a {{helpme}} template on your user talk page along with whatever your question is. If it is done, we can check over the article to make sure it satisfies all the concerns raised at the AFD and meets other standards to avoid any surprises. Hersfold (t/a/c) 04:29, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for moving that page and for all of your help thus far. I spent this morning cleaning up the page and making the reference links more robust. The article now has 5 external links all from third parties that are in no way affiliated with Manhattan GMAT. I also greatly cut back the flowery language on the page leaving only those section s that were most impartial. I tried to mimic language found on the pages of other test preparation companies or to use language that similar to the lines found in referring articles. I believe this page may be ready for the "mainspace" but I'd be happy to have it looked over and changed by more seasoned eyes first. I certainly think that the concerns of the AFD have been greatly ameliorated by my changes and I hope that any further changes that are deemed necessary can be made as well. I appreciate all of your help and I look forward to hearing the next steps. ImTheBombardier (talk) 16:57, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just reviewed the article for Hersfold, and I would say it's good enough for mainspace. It has references, and third party ones from major newspapers at that...it's neutral, well written grammatically and etc, and I can't find any real problems even when nitpicking. It's quite a nice article, and I would say congratulations on having written such a good article while having a COI. Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. 06:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Ks0stm's review, well done. You'll notice I made one minor change last night to remove a number of (R) symbols; these aren't strictly necessary and it's general convention to leave them out of articles. Aside from that, though, this looks ready to move out. I'll try to get one more reviewer to look it over to make sure, but then I'll see about moving it back in and restoring the previous revisions of the article underneath it. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Ks0stm. I greatly admire Wikipedia and its general mission so I put in a lot of research before starting the work on the article. I'm glad that my research paid off and resulted in a good article. I appreciate you looking it over for me and giving such kind feedback.
Hersfold, thank you for your help throughout this process. I'm glad to see that the article can be moved to the mainspace soon. Thank you for fixing the (R) symbols, I was unaware of the convention there. I look forward to the other reviewer's comments and I look forward to the eventual move into the mainspace. ImTheBombardier (talk) 18:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hersfold, I just want to check in and see if there is anything more I can do to improve my article while we are waiting for another set of eyes to look over the page. If there is anything else I can do to prepare for the move over to the mainspace, please let me know. Thank you! ImTheBombardier (talk) 20:18, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, sorry for the delay. I'll have someone look at it now. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hersfold, no worries about the delay, I know that I'm not the only case you are working on and you have really been a huge help. After looking at the comments of the second reviewer (Sven Manguard), I made some final edits for my article. Sven said he would be out of communication for a while and that I should take the discussion to Articles for Creation for further consideration. I am fairly confident in the rigor of my article and would be happy to move it to AFC for review, but I am concerned that doing so would lose the edit history that you mentioned reinstating in an earlier post. Please advise on how I should move forward with getting my article placed in the mainspace. Should I go to AFC or is there another form of creation that is better for restoring past articles? I'm very excited that my article seems to be reaching completion. Thank you again for all of your help. I am sorry to impose. ImTheBombardier (talk) 17:10, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I'm not terribly familiar with how AFC works these days; it *should* be possible to mark your article for AFC's attention without moving it, but I don't know for certain. I'll check into that. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:38, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for looking into it for me. If I need to bring it to someone else, please let me know and I'll be happy to do the legwork. I hate to put too much on your plate. Thanks! ImTheBombardier (talk) 19:24, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again Hersfold, my article got created! However, I was hoping for your help one more time. Bongomatic has flagged it as lacking notability. Mono (who created the article after it passed AFC) tried to remove the tag and support the notability of the page, but Bongomatic said that it still didn't pass muster. I know that Bongomatic was involved in the last deletion debate and I am worried that he is biased against it due to actions that occurred in the last deletion debates. As you were also involved in the last deletion, I was hoping you could vouch for the good faith with which this article has been recreated. I believe that I have certainly proven notability and made a worthy article (as Ks0stom, Mono, and others have noted as I worked to build the article). I appreciate all you help thus far and would love any more advice you could give at this point. Thanks! ImTheBombardier (talk) 02:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the deletion of Palda Records

While we are waiting for your ridiculous, unfounded and needlessly agressive accusation of sockpuppetry to be settled, perhaps you would be kind enough to address our actual gripe: the deletion of Palda Records. Please could you reinstate it? veghead (talk) 00:58, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I replied above. You're welcome to read what I said there. Hersfold (t/a/c) 04:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
@Hersfold: You have yet to address the fact that you erroneously deleted the Palda records article. since it was in error, your obligation is to restore it. Your reasoning wasn't dubious, it was factually wrong. Palda records was a record label, not a recording artist. Therefore you need a new reason OR you should restore the entry. Josefritz (talk) 02:59, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no such obligation, as you are the one who is mistaken. The deletion log, which you can view here, clearly states it was deleted as a "Group/band/club/company/etc [that] doesn't indicate importance/significance." This is criterion for speedy deletion A7, which has gone largely unchanged since 2008. Since at no point neither you nor your coworkers/alternate accounts (whichever they are) have deigned to request this undeletion in a civil manner, and in more than one point have insulted my intelligence and otherwise directed personal attacks at me, I have no inclination to accede to your request whatsoever. I have replied above, informing you that you are welcome to recreate this article if you have sufficient reliable sources to justify the notability of this record label. If you require it, I am willing to assist with such, as I did another user above, however I do require that I be treated with a modicum of common courtesy. Hersfold (t/a/c) 03:18, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert reverted

I noticed that you removed an addition by a banned user at WikiLeaks. You may like to check this edit which reverted your edit. Johnuniq (talk) 06:43, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up, I appreciate it. Hersfold (t/a/c) 06:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Regarding User:SCFilm29, and possibly User:Mystylplx, the following may be of interest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Griot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Scibaby

I left a message for you on User:Eagles247 talk page, as well. With your permission, I will pass on the contact information you've provided for private correspondence and detail. Thank you.

Very Truly Yours,

99.59.98.198 (talk) 08:48, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've already checked Mystylplx, and they appear to be unrelated, technically speaking. I didn't notice that they were too similar to any other accounts that regularly edited on their network range. Scibaby usually edits from another network entirely and many of his frequent ranges are blocked due to his abuse. Regardless, if you have anything that may connect SCFilm29 to one of these users, we'd be interested in seeing it. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:00, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request to unblock Matthew2602

Hey Hersfold, myself and other editors were discussing random things on the RuneScape Wiki IRC channel when somehow the conversation turned to User:Matthew2602 wondering if he could be unblocked here. I've known this user for quite some time now, and can vouch for him in saying that he is not a sockpuppet of that user, who neither him nor myself have heard of before his blocking. I think that it is safe to assume that the IP that both Matthew2602 and the sockpuppeteer was dynamic, and used by multiple users. Perhaps other users were also unjustly blocked during that case; who knows.

Once upon a time, I woke up one morning in July two years ago, only to find that I was blocked from editing on the only wiki that I was active on at the time, mylegonetwork.wikia.com. That wiki had about 20 active users then, and upon some very quick investigation it seemed that I had been caught up in the autoblock of a user who was blocked for one day for some minor policy violation. Anyways, I got an admin to unblock me and went on my merry way. A few hours later, when talking with him and other users on the IRC, I found out that he lives in the southern United States. I live in Alberta, Canada. We were both using the same IP. Beyond my nice little story, I've known User:Matthew2602 for months. I know that he is a good user with only good faith intentions, and I also know that he would like to be able to edit here again. It would be nice if he could be unblocked without large quantities of bureaucratic pointlessness, but that can happen if needed.

Thanks, Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:12, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If he was blocked as a confirmed sock, that means that more than just the IP matched up. I also don't see that unblocking him would be a benefit to the project, as his only edit to the article space was vandalism.
If he wants to be unblocked, he'll need to make an appeal himself anyway. Third-party appeals are not accepted. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:23, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, but you should know that his only mainspace edit could have easily been done in good faith, in fact as an attempt to revert vandalism. He just didn't look into the history enough to find out where the page should have been redirected to. Additionally, out of pure curiosity, which of his two edits confirm that he is a sockpuppet? What other factors are there? Thanks, Ajraddatz (Talk) 04:12, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The sockpuppetry was confirmed using checkuser; looking back at the SPI archive, it seems he was one of a large list of users that shared an identical useragent (meaning same operating system, internet browser, etc.). Curiously, I did note that Matthew could possibly be another user based on their edits, which don't match MileyFan1990's usual actions. Now that I see that, I'd be more willing to consider an unblock, but I still need him to appeal; I cannot accept a third-party request. Hersfold (t/a/c) 04:19, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I'll contact him tomorrow and get him to appeal. Thanks again. Ajraddatz (Talk) 04:28, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You should also be aware that The_last_username_left_was_taken has contacted me about his unjust block. Here again is someone that I know - this time better than the first - that has been unjustly blocked per your checkuser evidence. I have used checkuser before. I know that it cannot determine that two accounts were created from the same computer. Regardless, Matthew still hasn't appealed him block, despite my telling him to do so, so I don't know what's happening there. Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:33, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
CU is able to show enough data to show that two accounts had the same user agents and I think can get XFF data as well. At any rate, Ajraddatz, there's nothing you can do at this time—the blocked users will need to appeal themselves and they could, well, actually be sockpuppeteers, regardless of if you know them. (And something just like that happened recently.) The only thing we can do is have a CU to look over the data again. Hersfold, see User_talk:The_last_username_left_was_taken#Unblock_Request. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 16:59, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know with 100% certainty that neither users are sockpuppets. Additionally, considering how dynamic IPs are, and how most people in the English speaking world use one of four browsers, perhaps some better system needs to be invented for dealing with sockpuppetry. Regardless, that isn't why I'm here. I really would like to see a fairer system regarding sockpuppetry, however, as it seems that a checkuser can act as the prosecution, judge and jury in this manner. On that note, no, I don't want to turn it into some rediculous legal system which can go on for years with appeals, re-trials, etc. Thanks for both of your time. Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:15, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ajraddatz, I've just left a detailed explanation of my actions on TLULWT's talk page. As you can see, this is a very clear-cut case; the IP address he's using has been static for months, and the other account popped up in the middle of that time period with an identical useragent. You can also see that I was willing to assume good faith on his part, and approached him to ask about the other account. He evaded my questions, and that plus the other evidence I had available led me to conclude the account was his. If he is able to provide an explanation that fits the evidence, I am willing to listen to it (that was the point of the block). However, the explanation he's giving still has a few holes in it, as I've explained there.
The sockpuppetry system we have in place is really very accurate; I've only seen a very few instances where a checkuser block was placed incorrectly, and in each case the explanation provided by the blocked user was understandable given what checkuser returned. The most inaccurate sockpuppetry blocks are always those based on behavioral evidence, although in those cases the behavior is often enough to warrant blocking anyway. If you have any thing you'd like to send me privately concerning TLULWT and his block, please feel free to email me, but I would encourage you to read my explanation there first. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:11, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

BOTREQ

You attention is kindly drawn to this. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:22, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...yes? What is it? Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:14, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He is just upset that I will not let him repeatedly re-post the same BOTREQ that goes against an RfC. ΔT The only constant 17:18, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok... while you probably could have been a little more polite there, Δ, Andy, if there is an RfC that was closed against whatever it is you're trying to do, then you should be respecting the consensus formed there. I'm still a little unclear on what's going on, as I'm kinda lacking context, but it sounds like you both have a point here. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:23, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is no RfC against the changes in that BOTREQ; as I have already pointed out. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas!

To the Fir-Tree (Anonymous)

O Fir-tree green! O Fir-tree green!
   Your leaves are constant ever,
Not only in the summer time,
But through the winter's snow and rime
   You're fresh and green forever.

O Fir-tree green! O Fir-tree green!
   I still shall love you dearly!
How oft to me on Christmas night
Your laden boughs have brought delight.
O Fir-tree green! O Fir-tree green!
   I still shall love you dearly.

Also 

Happy (belated) Hanukkah!

Happy Eid al-Adha!

Happy Kwanzaa!

Happy Festivus!

Happy New Year!

May this holiday season bring you the music of laughter, the warmth of friendship, and the steadying hand of love. Cheers! /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 04:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images uncathegorized

I em sorry, I received a message by you, but i not speak english. Je ne comprend pas votre avis, je ne sais pas ce que vous m'avez écrit, pourtant j'aurai besoin d'une explication en italien ou en fancais, en latin aussi si vous voulez (mai ce dérnier doit ètre tres simple). Désolé, je suis seul, et en ces jours-ci je ne peu pas sortir. Je vous rémerci et vous avue un Merry Chritmas... hélas! C'et tot ce je connais de votre langue. Mon adress en Wikipedia it [5]
Non capisco una parola d'inglese, purtroppo, e me ne rammarico. Ho già ricevuto in passato un avviso in cui mi si dice che devo far qualcosa per alcune immagini, ma non capisco né cosa, né come. Non posso uscire, per il momento... Colgo l'occasione per augurarvi Buon Natale. Indirizzo Wikipedia it [6] --FranzJosef (talk) 20:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Molto simpatico il vostro gatto :)

Pardon, j'ai trouvé une page d'instructions en fr. Merci et à bientôt. --FranzJosef (talk) 22:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Il semble que vous avez compris les choses. S'il vous plaît laissez-moi savoir si vous avez plus de difficulté avec ça. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:54, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas Card

User:DeltaQuad/Christmas2010

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

/* Christmas mottos */

The motto idea for those between 25th December and mid January needs consensus dtermined badly on which version should be used for which day or even whether the whole idea should be scrapped or postponed. Please help by discussion and determining consensus at WT:Motto of the day/Nominations#Christmas series and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/Specials. The deadline is Friday at 9pm UTC. Simply south (talk) and their tree 23:31, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IRC

Mind coming on IRC to discuss a CU-related issue? --Addihockey10e-mail 16:47, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can't just now, but I can probably be on in an hour or so if you still need help. Sorry, we're closing my building for winter break and my free time is about to run out. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah okay :) Thanks! --Addihockey10e-mail 16:59, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:212.156.67.30 whom I suspect is the same user User:Omulazimoglu when he/she is not logged is engaging in edit warring in the picture gallery in the bottom of the Ankara page, by insisting of putting a particular photo of a slum in the city that is normally reserved for landmarks of that city. Picture galleries of city articles in Wikipedia ara usually reserved for landmarks rather than slums. Pictures of non-landmarks such as slums for example can be put separatly in other areas of the article. This user started the edit war when he/she was logged in as User:Omulazimoglu and continues it while being unlogged under the same I.P. number User:212.156.67.30. I have observed this edit warring and other anonymous users have joined the edit warring as well on this picture of a slum, but today (27 December 2010) in exasperation I reverted his/her latest edit and personally warned him today about this, even though I am not an administrator nor have the authority and do not visit Wikipedia very frequqently.

This is the slum picture which caused the edit war:

Could you warn this user about this and if necessary block him/her for a while?

Menikure 21:35, 27 December 2010

(Sorry, I added the request while I forgot that I was not logged in, and found oud just after I checked the view history. Menikure)

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

WikiXDC: Wikipedia 10th Birthday!

National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)

You are invited to WikiXDC, a special meetup event and celebration on Saturday, January 22 hosted by the National Archives and Records Administration in downtown Washington, D.C.

  • Date: January 22, 2011 (tentatively 9:30 AM - 5 PM)
  • Location: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), downtown building, Pennsylvania Avenue & 7th St NW.
  • Description: There will be a behind-the-scenes tour of the National Archives and you will learn more about what NARA does. We will also have a mini-film screening featuring FedFlix videos along with a special message from Jimmy Wales. In the afternoon, there will be lightning talks by Wikimedians (signup to speak), wiki-trivia, and cupcakes to celebrate!
  • Details & RSVP: Details about the event are on our Washington, DC tenwiki page.

Please RSVP soon as possible, as there likely will be a cap on number of attendees that NARA can accommodate.

Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. BrownBot (talk) 02:04, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

cite court

Do you think we might have three more fields to the cite court template? judge= the name of the judge whose judgement is being cited neutral-citation= for the neutral citation - the official citation system in the UK since 2001, which consists of the year, the court (e.g. H.L. for House of Lords), and the sequential case number. eg [2005] HL 12 is the 12th case heard by the House of Lords in 2005. The system was back-dated, and the year is not always the same as the year of the law report. Also other-citation= for other systems and older cases. Thanks. :-) Oliver Low (talk) 01:22, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

Category:Commons OTRS volunteers

Shouldn’t your bot point to, as the category header says, the more comprehensive list of OTRS personnel on commons at Special:ListUsers/OTRS-member rather than the category itself when it delivers messages to user talkpages? :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 21:49, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the last username left was taken's block...

You seem to have missed his response, so I'd like to direct you to it. Also, if you are unable to assume good faith, correctly interprit the checkuser results, or just don't have enough time, then I'll ask another checkuser. Thanks, Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:30, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hersfold has not edited since 22 Dec, so if you wish a speedy response to your somewhat backhanded request you may wish to try another CU. Syrthiss (talk) 19:49, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done, and thanks. Ajraddatz (Talk) 14:50, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

Orphaned non-free image File:Panoramio-Screenshot.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Panoramio-Screenshot.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. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:41, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Important Message

Hersfold, an important message left for you here was deleted by User:Risker without explanation. You and I communicated at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Eagles247/Archive_17#Ralph_Nader about User:Mystylplx, User:Scibaby, User:Griot. I also sent the information to functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org as you suggested. Why was my message deleted? 99.93.193.128 (talk) 07:42, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

Wikimania 2012 bid, DC chapter & next meetup!

  1. At WikiXDC in January, User:Harej proposed that DC submit a bid to host Wikimania 2012. A bid and organizing committee is being formed and seeks additional volunteers to help. Please look at our bid page and sign up if you want to help out. You can also signup for the bid team's email list.
  2. To support the Wikimania bid, more events like WikiXDC, and outreach activities like collaborations with the Smithsonian (ongoing) and National Archives, there also has been discussion of forming Wikimedia DC, as an official Wikimedia chapter. You can express interest and contribute to chapter discussions on the Wikimedia DC Meta-Wiki pages.
  3. To discuss all this and meet up with special guest, Dutch Wikipedian User:Kim Bruning, there will be a meetup, Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 16 this Tuesday at 7pm, at Capitol City Brewery, Metro Center. There will be a pre-meetup Wikimania team meeting at 6pm at the same location.

Apologies for the short notice for this meetup, but let's discuss when, where & what for DC Meetup #17. Also, if you haven't yet, please join wikimedia-dc mailing list to stay informed. Cheers, User:Aude (talk)

Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

HersfoldOTRSBot

Would you be so kind as to kick off HersfoldOTRSBot to:

  • Replace any OTRS pending tags dated February 2011 or earlier with {{subst:nopd}}
  • Notify users accordingly
  • Bug any OTRS volunteers who added {{OTRS received}} in February 2011 or earlier to check up on the ticket?

Thanks in advance! Stifle (talk) 08:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello from MOTD

Hello. We could do with your assistance for suggestions of mottos and any decisions on current ones. Please see Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations. In case this situation occurs again, we would like a discussion on emergency mottos. Please see WT:MOTD/N#Emergency mottos. Stifle (talk) 08:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Existence does not prove notability

Wikipedia:Existence does not prove notability, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Existence does not prove notability and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Existence does not prove notability during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. I Help, When I Can. [12] 03:02, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your status template

I just tried to add your status template to my userpage. As a recent Computer Science grad, I'm embarassed to say that I'm stuck on getting it to change status. I'm hoping not only that you can help me get it to work, but also that this is the right place for this question. I'll be watching your page, so feel free to answer here at your convenience. Thank you in advance, and sorry if I'm wasting your time. Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 01:32, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ken Hoang (4th nomination)

A new user posted a 'vote' on the above page using your signature. Thought you should know. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 22:10, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

Grammar Nazi

I feel one of your userboxes is very offesensieve 

redder rose (User talk:readin gmad)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hersfold&oldid=425855781"