User talk:MuZemike

Subpages: Articles worked on · Good article reviews · GA standards · common.css · common.js

Archives as of the dates listed (250KB or more to load; threads more than 3 days to be archived by bot or earlier upon personal discretion; displayed in order of date of last thread):

2009-04-29 · 2009-10-17 · 2010-01-09 · 2010-04-27 · 2010-08-12 · 2010-11-21 · 2010-03-10 · 2011-08-07 · 2012-01-28 · 2012-09-17 · present

Hello

Hey

Thought I should make you aware of this that somebody just posted on my talk page. I've deleted it from the public archives just to be on the safe side but from what I can see it seems to be about a Wiki conversation of some sort?--5 albert square (talk) 01:41, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about all the others? In any case, it doesn't make a difference; it's bloody obvious the GNAA is out to get me. –MuZemike 03:25, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Freddie Mercury on your userpage

Hey, just wanted to let you know that it didn't go unnoticed, and was pretty cool. - Sudo Ghost 03:50, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

REmmet1984

Could you talk a look at history of User_talk:REmmet1984.Does all those users are his sockpuppets or it someone else that put him in a bad light?--Shrike (talk) 05:51, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two more now

Confirmed and indefinitely blocked. –MuZemike 06:16, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is, if this wasn't obvious enough. –MuZemike 06:20, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another question.What do you think about this users Special:Contributions/Abutoum and Special:Contributions/Dalai_lama_ding_dong do you think they are new users?Thank you.--Shrike (talk) 12:02, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, they appear

Unrelated. However,

Confirmed another sock of REmmet1984:

Cmdciac (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Rangeblock now issued. –MuZemike 21:41, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon Warrior

I've added you as a co-nom. I've brought it up to FAC.陣内 _Jinnai 20:11, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care either way about the dates, but if we go standard format then I'd like a bot to come through and change them because that's a lot of changes that would need to take place.陣内 _Jinnai 21:34, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As long as we are consistent across the board; we can't have some of them have the standard format, while others in the same article have YYYY-MM-DD. –MuZemike 21:36, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Operation Rainfall for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Operation Rainfall is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Operation_Rainfall until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Crabbattler (talk) 20:57, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]