User talk:Favonian

Deleting Accounts

Delete My Accounts Beacause I Creates New Accounts 99.224.144.28 (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

We don't delete accounts. You are blocked and not allowed to edit. Favonian (talk) 23:30, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Incivility on return from a block

Hi, you recently blocked User:122.161.78.118 for attacks. Their editing behaviour since returning from that block is probably best described as mixed. However, even among the good stuff there is unduly belligerent/attacking phraseology, a classic of which is this. If they keep up that sort of tone then we are going to hit problems with civility across quite a range of articles as various ethnic groups take up sides. As it happens, their sources on this occasion seem perfectly reasonable to me, although I have yet to really get my head around the subject. What can we do in situation such as this? - Sitush (talk) 19:35, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

It is getting worse. Practically every article edit they make is being reverted by one person or another. And they are beginning to move around IP addresses. - Sitush (talk) 11:01, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Hm. - Sitush (talk) 03:18, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fæ

A request for comments has been opened on administrator User:Fæ. You are being notified due to your prior participation in ANI, RfA, or RfC discussions regarding this user. Thank you, MadmanBot (talk) 19:51, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Edinburgh_Wanderer

Hello there, I ask that you assess this situation as no other admins have taken the situation seriously & we could potentially lose one highly productive Wikipedian. Please take a look, Regards. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 23:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

User talk:B&S Excursions

The talk page is the exact same as their web site "our story" page http://bsexcursions.com/page3.html . Murry1975 (talk) 00:02, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Spam and copyvio—not a pretty combination. I have blocked the account, deleted the user page and scraped the offending material off the talk page. Not much more to be done, unless they try to bring it back on the talk page. Favonian (talk) 00:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.Murry1975 (talk) 00:06, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Arko R. Pereira

Just a reminder, whoever recreated the article Arko R. Pereira is exceedingly likely to be a sockpuppet of User:Ark R. Pereira. Please check on that user and deal with it swiftly. ZZArch ^{talk to me} 23:01, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Way ahead of you. The most recent instances were created by Tst213 (talk · contribs) and Tst13 (talk · contribs), both of whom were retired earlier today. Furthermore, Peridon has salted the article indefinitely. It will probably show up again under a slightly different name. Favonian (talk) 23:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Vandal alert.

Hello. Sorry if I have to tell you this on short notice, but can you block 121.1.11.118 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)? Repeat vandal. I know you've dealt with this guy before. Please provide action ASAP. Thanks. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 12:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Blocked for one year. Favonian (talk) 12:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Can you also block/look into Bombo cdo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as well? He's not just a vandal byt changing pages to look like the Philippines has switched to HDTV (it hasn't), but there's also a concern of it being a sockpuppet. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 12:35, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely. Let's see what the SPI case brings forth. Favonian (talk) 12:40, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

IP Block

Thanks for blocking IP 64.30.37.252 for 3 months. AKS 20:27, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

They had it coming ;) Favonian (talk) 20:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Fyi

User:Goodbyz's claim in both unblock requests that the threat was not a legal threat within the meaning of WP:legal does not sit easily with me. When Goodbyz appeared at the Gingrich presidential campaign article talk page to advocate for the edit-warring multiple-IP user there (who promptly vanished, and has not reappeared therafter), Goodbyz was at pains to claim that the IP user is "an attorney"[1], and also claimed, at Goodbyz's UTP, that Goodbyz him/herself is the IP's "colleague",[2], i.e. someone with professional legal expertise of some kind. May or may not have a bearing. Writegeist (talk) 23:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, they are definitely not being forthright. I'm not inclined to accept any more waffling; either they retract or they remain blocked, possibly with their talk page access revoked. Favonian (talk) 23:34, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Darius

As you closed the requested move discussion at Talk:Darius I, could you look at [3] and [4]. And I love the fact that now Darius I is a redirect to itself. Thanks Did you see on ANI that Malleus has 'attacked' me for NPA? And an Admin on my talk page - I wish people would actually read WP:NPA, it clearly says it should be followed 'normally', not always. Homophobic and anti-Semitic rants don't have to be ignored. Dougweller (talk) 06:51, 6 February 2012 (UTC)T

Oh, Good Heavens! This place would be so boring without national "enthusiasts". One of these days, when I'm feeling bored, I'll stir up some trouble over the Schleswig-Holstein Question. It's been dormant for far too long.

Guess I ought to feel some solidarity with a person who worships our old gods, but I must concur with your assessment of her. If your remark is truly a personal attack, then I need to go back and revdel some of my old edit summaries, lest Niemöller's poem puts me next in line. I wouldn't pay too much attention to MF's outburst. They are triggered by a fairly simple algorithm: if an admin uses strong words and is not immediately blocked, then it's an example of Wikipedia's double standards. Martyrs can be very tiresome.

By the way, an amusing typo (hopefully not a Freudian slip) in this ANI comment: "IRA"?! Favonian (talk) 11:45, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that was a typo (I'd been careful in my earlier edit to avoid it but I guess then IRA stuck in my mind). I imagine most people would see MF's comment for what it was. I'm more annoyed by the Admin who warned me on my talk page. Hm, maybe I need to remind him of AGF besides the fact it says 'normally'. Dougweller (talk) 11:51, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Nah, there has been enough acronym swapping already. Bushranger just had a bad day, I guess. Favonian (talk) 11:55, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

And now someone I don't recall is following me around to ANI, Bushranger's page and my talk page. Sigh. I should have just blocked her instead of allowing her a chance to reply. Dougweller (talk) 14:23, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed. It's fallout from being anywhere near the MF debacle. Kind of funny, since I distinctly remember that gentleman making reference to the exact same poem a while ago. My advice would be to withhold nourishment from this particular species. Favonian (talk) 14:26, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Linda Albin

I found a search link for this reporter, so that verifies her work. Whether she's notable is another issue. Bearian (talk) 01:36, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note and the source. In my opinion, it doesn't assert notability according to any of our guidelines, so I'll let the PROD stand. Favonian (talk) 11:24, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Jlyster

Hi Favonian. It seems Jlyster just tried to post to this page (I'm assuming regarding the copyvio you just removed) but were blocked by the edit filter; not sure why, log is here. Anyhow I told them I'd drop you a note on their behalf, and to post their request to their own talk page if you want to follow up. Cheers, EyeSerene^talk 19:20, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! The edit filters do get a bit too "proactive" at times. Favonian (talk) 19:23, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I'm not sure why it thought that was a personal attack. Maybe it should be commenting in the arbcom civility case :) EyeSerene^talk 19:25, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, perish the thought! I'm giving that one a very wide berth. :( Favonian (talk) 19:27, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Me too. Funny, that... EyeSerene^talk 19:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Block conflicts

Three times today I have tried to block a user, only to find you have beaten me to it by seconds. The strange thing is that each time you have given exactly the same block length and exactly the same block reason that I was planning to give. I suppose that's what you call consensus. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:59, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

The best kind :) Favonian (talk) 20:01, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

because you're the only wikipedia administrator I know...

Sorry to bother you again with new user problems, but there seems to be an industry shill making disruptive edits to the page on hydraulic fracturing (i.e., systematically undermining the article's coverage of environmental hazards of the process). I've left them a note; is there anything else to be done in cases like this? Thanks again for your help and advice... Sindinero (talk) 16:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Members of that profession are not prohibited from editing Wikipedia, but they must be kept on a tight leash. They haven't edited since receiving your note, but I'll try and keep an eye on them. If they persist, strong measures need to be taken. Favonian (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Favonian,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 19:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you note

F., thank you very much for this[5]. It is deeply appreciated and I am glad you erased any trace of whatever it was.--Djathinkimacowboy 07:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For vigilance and a stalwart reliability. Thank you! --Djathinkimacowboy 07:19, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I second that. Cheers - DVdm (talk) 08:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Consensus?

In regards to Markus Persson, what consensus were you referring to? Was it where there were several neutral comments and strong opposes, along with a modest suggestion to move it to Notch (game designer)? If that's what you were referring to, then the consensus you were referring to was nonexistent. I cannot believe such a move would be initiated from such a weak and unsupported discussion, especially considering that we're acknowledging somebody by a pseudonym that is only half-and-half recognized. I suggest this move is reverted immediately. DarthBotto _talk•cont 10:32, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The strong oppose (by 70.24.247.54) was to the original proposal (Notch). Immediately below is a proposal for Notch (game designer) by 70.24.208.34, which I suppose is the same editor, who meanwhile was allocated a new IP by Bell Canada. Jenks24 was in favor of the disambiguated form, and I can't imagine the initial proposer being against it. Likewise, Mythpage88 is "down for that" (the original proposal) and shouldn't be opposed to the modified one. This leaves only H3llkn0wz and Wagner, who are neutral, the former admittedly slightly negative. All in all, I see no reason to revert the move. Favonian (talk) 20:35, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

That's fair enough, but I still believe that Persson's pseudonym is not major enough to designate him as that, considering that he's still referred to by his real name and he didn't change his legal name, that's all. DarthBotto _talk•cont 04:35, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Favonian. I really think that we met here and there on Wikipedia. Could you please see this edit this. Generally I am trying and I am actually good with people around, but this edit rolled the glass. The phrase, Use your brain! thing really bothered me. I really think that it should be sanctioned. Since you are administrator I would really like a help from you. Thanks — Tomica (talk) 18:47, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

It's not exactly polite, but in your immediately preceding edit summary you were shouting, and that's frowned upon as well. At present, I see no reason to step in with my large admin boots on. Favonian (talk) 21:47, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Shiny template, indeed

Hey Favonian, what I'm missing (at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of VeronicaPR) is a link to the SPI page. I always find those things very helpful. Is it there but I'm just not seeing it? Drmies (talk) 00:41, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure is, right at the end of the very first line, which contains various and sundry bits of information about the sockmistress. Favonian (talk) 00:44, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah I see it now--thanks. Drmies (talk) 00:51, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Please blank

Henry Balfour (MP for Fife). Kittybrewster ☎ 07:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks like you blanked it, and Zzyzx11 promptly deleted it. Favonian (talk) 09:45, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Vandal alert.

Sorry to disturb you, but can you block 27.112.68.51 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)? This is the latest IP address used by the Indonesian anime/NBC/movie studio misinformation vandal. He might be dormant right now, but I'm sure he'll strike again later on. Please do this ASAP. My Wi-Fi connection's slow right now because someone is using BitTorrent in my house right now; so I can't rollback his edits as fast as I wanted. Thanks. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 12:50, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Favonian (talk) 12:56, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Dude

Please, I have nothing. You're an admin that everybody loves and trusts, and everybody hates me on here and gives me a hard time. All my edits get reverted, and it really pisses me off. Idk dude, maybe wikipedias not my thing. Sensesfail123 (talk) 21:45, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

You should certainly stop and think before making more controversial edits. I just reverted this blanking of another editor's submission to AfC. The proposed article should probably be rejected, but blanking it and requesting its deletion is not the correct way to go about it. Favonian (talk) 21:50, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I thought it was just a normal page ): — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sensesfail123 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Italian, Italian-born, born in Italy, etc.

Hallo Favonian,

can you please keep an eye on Fermi, Giacconi, and other Italian-American (or American-Italian :-)) scientist articles? There is again an Italian guy trying to push them back to Italy, and Americans pulling them back in the U.S... I think that we should maintain as general rule the consensus reached on Fermi's discussion page ("Italian-Born, naturalized American")). Otherwise, let's open the discussion again :-( Thanks a lot, Alex2006 (talk) 07:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh dear, here we go again ;) I'll add Giacconi to my watch list and try to maintain the fragile consensus. Favonian (talk) 09:52, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of that, although I did misstate something

Thank you for taking care of the block to IP:92.13.28.165. I should mention that the diff I provided was not after the IP received level 4 warning. My mistake. The user did make a couple edits to Mount Logan after the last warning, but that involved a self revert I believe. Anyway, no biggie, I sure this was our old friend mountain vandal anyways, up to his usual games. Thanks again.--Racerx11 (talk) 00:09, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Same ISP, same MO—tasty alphabet soup. Favonian (talk) 00:13, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Block request

IP address making vandalizing changes to formatting (font color, sizes, etc.) Could you block this? Thanks, Sindinero (talk) 15:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

They haven't edited since receiving the level 3 warnings, so it's not time for the clue stick—yet. Favonian (talk) 16:29, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Gregg Jevin

Hi Favonian. Here on Wikipedia, he was presented as a real person, apparently in continuation of the Twitter joke.[6], [7]. I agree with tech.blorge. It is a brilliant satire :) --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 13:09, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

A touch to lighten up another tedious day of vandal slaying :) Wonder how long it'll be before this imaginary person actually meets our notability standards and gets a "real" article. Favonian (talk) 13:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

He's on the HuffPo and the Telegraph - seems pretty notable to me... TdwrighT 14:17, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Not he, but the event/joke might be notable. The deleted article introduced him to Wikipedia as a real person, and similar "jokes" are inappropriate for a serious encyclopedic project. The deletion was in my opinion justified, as the article was entirely misleading. You are free to start an article describing the story, but please focus on correct description of facts based on reliable sources, the online joking should not continue here on Wikipedia. It is in my opinion a very interesting story from various perspectives. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 14:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Btw, it seems that sources pop up like mushrooms after a good fall rain, see [8] Metro, [9] The Week. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

IP bypass

Hi F., Your actions to my ip address issue appear to of sorted it, Thanks Mdann52 (talk) 13:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Great! Hope the vandals at your school don't get too envious. Favonian (talk) 13:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for your diligence, and keeping an eye on my comments page and Rango. Boy, "creepy" sure is the right word! --Tenebrae (talk) 17:24, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure! If I were to express my true opinion of that person, I would get hit over the head by a pillar. Favonian (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Continued Use of Sock Puppets, and Block Evasion

Typhoonwikihelper switched to this IP Address: 218.103.152.230 (talk). This new IP sockpuppet needs to be reported to WP:ANI (and be blocked again), because he is refusing to stop, and because he is trying to evade his editing block. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 21:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Blocked for being kind of obvious. Thanks for your vigilance. Favonian (talk) 22:04, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I kind of was worried there. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 22:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

He's back again... as the IP 219.77.32.65. Are we ever going to be able to stop him? 72.197.249.141 (talk) 06:29, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Already blocked by another admin. Our "friend" has diversified into a new IP range, making it harder to block him preemptively. We'll just have to play Whac-A-Mole until he gets frustrated with all the wasted effort. Favonian (talk) 09:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

He told me that he would continuously change IPs (probably until he runs out of sockpuppets for good), and that whenever he gets the chance (if his IPs are still useable, after the block wears off) that he would continue. He persists in threatening, and quite frankly, I can't stand it anymore. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 22:56, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

We have two means at our disposal: range blocking and semi-protection. In case we have to use the latter, you too will be affected, so I strongly advise you to get an account. Favonian (talk) 23:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I highly doubt the latter would work, because he hinted that once protection wears off, he would resume, and because he edits multiple pages, to my dismay. However, if he is the only/dominant user using that range of IPs, and if it is possible to allow other to continue editing, then yes, I say that we should go with range blocking, if this "madness" continues. Even if we cannot "save" other editors within that IP range, if they don't edit all that often, than we should still go for the range block. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 23:51, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

If possible, we should just block off all IPs that are traced to the user Typhoonwikihelper, because all of those IPs we're talking about are his sockpuppets (but then again, I think we already know that). 72.197.249.141 (talk) 23:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Typhoonwikihelper is back again as 203.218.29.93, and this time he even admited it on Jason Rees's talk page. Typhoonwikihelper is also operating out of this IP Address: 203.218.29.116, as evident on Jason Rees's talk page. Unbelievably, this IP is still continuing to vandalize various pages, mostly through the first IP Address I mentioned. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 06:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

He's back again as 218.103.145.154, and he is still continuing to vandalize, like on Jason Rees's talk page. I don't know how we are going to handle this guy. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 05:51, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

If Typhoonwikihelper follows through on the following threat below, we should go with the rangeblock. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 06:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Threat (as seen on Jason Rees's talk page):

Please be noted that if i get too mad i will seriously create a Vandalism-only account 218.103.145.154 (talk) 06:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Threat provided by: 72.197.249.141 (talk) 06:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

We seriously have to stop him. I am really starting to get scared by now. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 06:27, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

He's an annoying little jerk, but there's no cause to be scared. CharlieEchoTango seems to be on top things, block-wise, so the typhoon is more like a storm in a teacup. Because of the time difference, I'm usually too late to join in the fun, but I have now blocked his most recently used IP range for a week, just to send him a message. Favonian (talk) 11:31, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I pattern I noted is that everyday that he is able to aquire a new "sockpuppet," he begins editing around 0500 UTC, which is around 12:00 A.M, Eastern US Time (EST). If he dosen't show up for a while, we may have won. Of course, we can't take that for granted. 72.197.249.141 (talk) 01:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I have found Typhoonwikihelper's oldest "IP Sockpuppet" yet, 203.218.175.13. Although that IP is currently inactive, along with another old "sock", 203.218.29.116, I am concerned that they may return again, especially since those IPsocks are not blocked. I have expressed my concerns. (PS, Typhoonwikihelper hasn't shown up yet. That could be good news. But as always with vandalists, we have to wait and see.) Sincerely, 72.197.249.141 (talk) 07:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, whatever: here Bruvtakesover (T|C) 12:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks like he found another range to play with. Gathering evidence for yet another range block . Favonian (talk) 13:00, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Permission Removal

Hello, Favonian. I would like to have my reviewer permission removed, since I have not used it for so long. illogicalpie^{(take a slice) 22:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)}

Will do. The whole "pending changes" thing was abandoned quite a while ago, so none of us have been using it in a long while ;) Favonian (talk) 22:22, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I see you're dealing with User talk:98.71.47.189...

He's a known disruptive editor with a history of misleadingly adding {SchoolIP} templates to his own talk. Has received a myriad of blocks on various IPs. Is currently intended to be under the effect of a range-block. I've notified MuZeMike, who's dealt with this particular editor in the past, and who was the one to apply the latest rangeblock. Salvidrim! 22:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Nvm, I see you're aware of the situation. It's become kind of hard to remember which Admins have dealt with him, there's so many... :) Salvidrim! 22:50, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Great! I got very tired of dealing with his talk page antics, so it was time for good dose of STFU. Favonian (talk) 22:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Well put. Salvidrim! 22:57, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Editting optometry

Hello, I am a student of optometry in America and you say I am vandalizing the optometry page. Well, in America optometrists can prescribe narcotic drugs to treat eye disease so what I am posting is not false. Do you want evidence? We are eye doctors here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.29.229 (talk) 00:33, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

You should definitely provide a source for that statement. While we're at it, optometrists are health care professionals, but not "eye doctors", which is why I have reverted this edit of yours. Favonian (talk) 00:38, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

And yes, we are doctors, we get paid the same as the eye surgeons (ophthalmologists) by government insurance for what is within our scope of practice.

Here are sources from the American Optometric Association: (these are the state by state laws) https://www.aoa.org/Images/oral.gif https://www.aoa.org/Images/glaucoma.gif https://www.aoa.org/Images/Controlled-Substance.gif https://www.aoa.org/Images/Injectables-12-2011.gif

And optometrists are considered physicians by Medicare which is the biggest insurance system in the USA: " The term “physician”, when used in connection with the performance of any function or action, means (1) a doctor of medicine or osteopathy...(4) a doctor of optometry, but only for purposes of subsection (p)(1) with respect to the provision of items or services described in subsection (s) which he is legally authorized to perform as a doctor of optometry by the State in which he performs them..."

http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title18/1861.htm

Are you from America? The laws here are different than every other country in regards to optometrists. So please do not insult us. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.29.229 (talk) 00:48, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Also, you should remove the ophthalmic opticians line in the beginning because this is not true for the United States. Or at least say this is not true in America. We are eye doctors here not ophthalmic opticians. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.29.229 (talk) 00:51, 28 February 2012‎ (UTC)

Well, live and learn. Sorry for my drastic response. Be sure to add those sources with appropriate notes saying where these rules apply. No, I'm not American, but I did live in that country for a number of years. Favonian (talk) 00:54, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks I will :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.29.229 (talk) 00:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Is the top paragraph locked? I cannot edit it. I just setup my username. I just want to clarify that we are not ophthalmic opticians in America. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shnurek (talk • contribs) 00:59, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Which of the articles are we talking about now? None of the ones you've edited before appear to be protected. By the way, we can't protect parts of an article—it's all or nothing. Favonian (talk) 01:03, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optometry the top paragraph doesn't seem to have an edit button or am I missing it? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shnurek (talk • contribs) 01:04, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see! Not a matter of protection; you have to check the appropriate box in "My preferences/Gadgets/Appearance". Favonian (talk) 01:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me jumping in here, I just happened to be lurking, Favonian, I believe you are refering to the box in Gadgets labeled "Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page". Checking this box should work but there should already be, by default, an edit tab at very top of the page which enables editing of the entire page. Shnurek, are you not seeing that? Curious if you are not.

Also, Shnurek, there some concern about the use of the word "narcotics" in one of your edits since it carries some negative conotations with people outside the medical fields. Could we perhaps use the names of the specific narcotics instead, codeine for example, if that is one used? If not, and "narcotic" is the best word to use in this case, then so be it.--Racerx11 (talk) 01:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Talk page stalkers always welcome :) "Narcotics" was indeed the word that anesthetized my belief in good intentions. Looks like Shnurek is editing happily, so it was only a matter of the magic link at top of the lead paragraph. Favonian (talk) 01:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I will change to oral analgesics or oral pain medications Pain medications is more accurate as analgesics are only one type of pain medication.

Someone deleted my physician reference, from the social security administration government website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shnurek (talk • contribs) 01:37, 28 February 2012‎ (UTC)

Should I put it back up?Shnurek (talk) 01:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

You should pay attention to the comments by the editor who objected to parts of your contribution. "Unique situation" and "successful" don't agree well with WP:NPOV.

I'm signing off now. One consequence of not living in the U.S. is that it's really very late in my timezone. Favonian (talk) 01:43, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Aïn Taya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kolea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Dale45 complaint

What did I do to Bowie, Texas to have a "final warning?" If Richi Trotte isnt notable, then neither are "Rodeo cowboys." I don't understand the problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dale45 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit to page 'Legend'

I've been recently sent a message that I made an edit to the page called 'Legend'. This is part of the message I got: 'Favonian (talk) 12:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC)'

I'm telling the truth when I say that I haven't editted this page. I've never seen the page before and I couldn't find out what I had supposedly editted. I was sent a message that my edit had been reverted or removed as it did not appear constructive

I don't have a wikipedia account, so if the pages needed to be signed in to edit, I couldn't have done that. I'm hoping that I have just been wrongly accused and haven't been hacked.

I know this isn't you who sent this, but I also got another message about 'North Bromsgrove High School' that I vandalised the page. I could find out what I had written and it was 'what a big headed fool haha SPJ' after someone's name. The user who sent me that was Mephistophelian. 'Mephtalk 12:52, 18 June 2011 (UTC)'

I'm really sorry about the trouble I may have caused, but I really haven't done these edits. Please could you look into it for me? Thank you for taking the time to read this and maybe believe me.

109.157.1.66 (talk) 22:00, 29 February 2012 (UTC)