User talk:Excirial

Excirial

Excirial

	Userpage	Talk	Awards	E-Mail	Dashboard	Programs	Sandbox	Sketchbook	Blocknote

 

 

Talk

Rank Uiller article Hi Excirial. First, I want to say thank you, for your time. And Happy New Year! I've made some changes on my article and I want to know if they meet the guidelines regarding Reliable Sources. Kind regards, Zoe. Zoepe (talk) 21:18, 29 December 2012 (UTC) Hello there Zoepe, I might be wrong, but at first glance it would appear that the references used are the names of several expositions that art was showcased on? I fear that this doesn't fall under reliable sourcing as these references cannot be looked up by anyone (While being also of temporal nature). Since the article is a so-called BLP page, a Biography of a Living Person the requirement for sources is several notches higher than it would be for other article's to be accepted. What you are looking for are sources such as newspapers that can confirm what is written in the article itself. There might also be coverage in other literature such as magazines that can qualify as reliable. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 22:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC) Syrian Civil War Thanks for reverting my "test" word on the above. You beat me to the revert button. I just did that because there was a confusing message about the page being semi-protected and I didn't know if I could edit it or not. So I did a tiny test (which I was going to revert if successful). Thanks. Frenchmalawi (talk) 20:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC) No worries. A semiprotected page is protected in such a way that unregistered (Editors without an account) and unconfirmed (Accounts younger then 4 days or accounts with less then 10 edits) editors cannot change the page. In case you are interested, there is a list of protection types and their restrictions here. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 11:03, 5 January 2013 (UTC) AFCBuddy 78.26 Thanks for creating this script! A couple of questions. First, shouldn't anyone appearing in the "Running Total" list below the leaderboard automatically be included? Also, the script seems to have a bug. I haven't counted anyone else's, but I've reviewed 31 articles, not 21. The script changed the number on the leaderboard. All the best, 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 22:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC) Darn it, i didn't expect people to find my tampering with the scoring in my favor so quickly! ;). It seems i forgot to tell the script that capital letters don't matter (AFCH != afch unless you explicitly state it is.). The reviews it missed are now correctly being counted. On the other hand, it is now assuming you have 40 reviews since it counts both the actual article and the redirect page that was created by moving the page. I'll iron that issue out in a bit. Hopefully the script will be quite stable in a couple of days. Oh, and thanks for mentioning the issue - much appreciated! Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 23:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC) And that issue is now fixed as well. One or two user month counts are still off by 1 or 2 reviews, but I'll look into that. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) SpeedReader Yes, Why am I not on the leader board? at the time that the script ran, I had 40 reviews. Thanks, Jakob 23:05, 4 January 2013 (UTC) P.S. Thanks for relieving me with the script! Before, I was the one who had to manually update the leaderboard It seems that you aren't using the AFC helper script to review pages. AFCBuddy detects pages by the default summary's it places when accepting or moving a page. There are a few possible solutions i can think off: If you could review pages using the AFC helper script it would detect edits as normal (Any reason why you are not using it?). Since updating the review list is manual copy-n-paste work i could leave any old reviews there. Equally i could adjust the review count of your username in the tool, so that it would offset the reviews it cannot detect itself. If you cannot or don't want to use the AFC Helper script for reviewing i can simply use your review list as a basis for the scoreboard (A simple count of the diffs on that page). A side effect would be that you would need to keep updating that page manually, since AFCBuddy wouldn't be able to detect any reviews from you :/ Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 23:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC) Alright, since I cannot use the AFC Helper Script, see this, and this for more on that, I'll add myself manually. Thanks! --Jakob 23:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC) Quite unfortunate you can't use it - it is quite a handy script for reviewing. To at least reduce your workload a little bit i added a little tweak to AFCHelper. When it tries to check your accounts edits it will use an alternative procedure that counts the amount of reviews listed at January 2013 Backlog Elimination Drive/SpeedReader. The result of count that (Currently 56 links, just as listed) will be used when generating the scoreboard. It won't prevent you from having to keep that page up to date manually, but at the very least you shouldn't have to worry about keeping the scoreboard up to date anymore Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 01:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Thanks a ton!! That's great! Thanks again, Jakob 04:18, 5 January 2013 (UTC) User talk:Codexsinai Regarding User talk:Codexsinai, I think user:Aboveallelse77 may be a related account. As on the past link, user:CFred and user:Floquenbeam had been dealing with him and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aboveallelse77/Archive too. History2007 (talk) 10:40, 5 January 2013 (UTC) I don't think there are many people who would solemny focus on adding a specific person to the exact same set of article's either. I blocked Codexsinai for being a Duck. Thanks for mentioning that case! Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 10:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC) deleted page (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Watch The Duck) Hi Excirial, I saw that you deleted my page for a copyright violation, however I did reference that the page was a copied biography off the artist's facebook site, and included the link to it in the references section. Can you advise me on how to modify the page to not be deleted? Is there a writer/editor on Wikipedia who can rearrange the format to better serve that of Wikipedia pages? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbandz (talk • contribs) 21:14, 2 January 2013 (UTC) Hiyas there Dbandz, Simply mentioning that you copied content word-for-word from an external source doesn't comply with copyright laws. You can literally quote small pieces of an external source where relevant, but you cannot copy an entire page unless its license allows this (Such as when a page is licensed under CC-BY-SA). You can, however, use a page as a basis for writing your own text by paraphrasing it. Note that simply changing a word or two is not enough in that case. Another method is simply searching a set of publications detailing your article's topic, and then writing your own page based on the information that is on those pages. While doing so you might want to have a look at the good article list as well for an example of a good page (Darren Middleton is a fairly short example that is probably easy to follow). Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 16:15, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Article on French Connect (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/French Connect) Hi Excirial, Happy New Year! Thank you for your feedback on my article for submission. I have taken on board your feedback and think in hindsight I placed too much emphasis on the company's own website, therefore i can see why you thought it read too much like a promotional piece. I have also looked at another trade event, the World Travel Market, and taken some pointers from their wiki page. I have removed quotes, and some other references, which although factual, could be also seen as promotional. I hope this second attempt is an improvement and welcome any further pointers if not. Best regards and thanks for your work. Artur — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexarturWalsh (talk • contribs) 18:09, 3 January 2013 (UTC) Hiyas there Alexartur, The current version is a definite improvement over the old one, which was indeed quite spammy. I have taken the liberty to change a few things in the article, mostly by repairing the internal links which weren't formatted correctly. I see it is already back in the review queue as well, so i presume someone will have a look at it in the next few days (Personally i try to evade reviewing the same piece multiple times in a row, so that a fresh pair of eyes can have a look as well). Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 16:30, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Thanks Excirial AlexarturWalsh (talk) 16:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/mechanical mineral conversion Hello, Can you please explain me the reason why the article is deleted, it contains common known general information and mostly information which is based on personal experience with a pilot plant of the mentioned technology. I dont understand where it violates any copyrigths. --Alldaysun57 (talk) 12:44, 4 January 2013 (UTC) Hiyas there Alldaysun57, The article was removed as a copyright violation because a large section of the text in it was a literal copy of http://www.global-ecofuel.com/english/projects.html. You can use an external page as an inspiration for writing an article, but creating a word-for-word copy of a webpage text is not allowed under copyright laws. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 16:35, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Neon_Chemicals the article which I have wrote concerning "Neon Chemicals" is about my company; and the content is taken from its official site http://www.neonchemicals.com. Could you help me out for this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Neon_Chemicals Looking forward to hear from your valued side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.128.31.110 (talk) 12:08, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Hiyas there 203.128.31.110, I declined the article as a copyright violation since the text of the article was directly copied from another source. Under US law copyright is automatically granted on all written texts, and is therefor present unless the writer specifically waives these rights. Copyright restricts what one can do with a text - for example, it may not be freely altered or reproduced, which is necessarily for Wikipedia. Due to this Wikipedia only accepts texts that are either licensed under GDFL or CC-BY-SA (or a more lenient license) Having said that i would equally point out that it is rarely a good idea to copy content directly, even if the license allows it. An encyclopedic text requires another structure and writing style then most other texts, and thus it is rare for these texts to be accepted as an article. I would recommend looking in the good article category for an article with a similar subject as your own, and using that as a basis for your own article. However, before spending time it is best to read WP:CORP, WP:V and WP:RS, and checking if your article can meet these policies requirements. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 16:39, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sainath Dukkipati pls.review it and select it i did a lot of hardwork on this,i'm just 13 from where will i get perfect reliable sources and I even challenged my friends that i'll get it done on wikipedia sainath dukkipati is a rising star he already signed more than 18 films with the big daddy's of bollywood and he's presence in the films are kept secret until the trailers are released. Some of his films are: chennai express,dabanng 3,milan talkies,gunday,e.t.c. so pls. accept it i'm begging you guys pls. if u guys aren't satisfied atleast accept it and make it and let it be an article for 3-5 days.Pls. I'm pleading you guys pls. there are more websites on his name if you want i can post them as reliable sources to, pls. my whole article is good ony the reliable sources is a problem but i provided you guys with 2 reliable sources if u want more websites on his name i gan give Wiki Associate — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.145.177 (talk) 12:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Hiyas there 122.169.145.177, A page - and especially a page concerning a living person - can only be accepted if there are reliable sources backing up the content of that page. In this case there are simply no reliable sources in the page: References 1 and 2 are personal sites, thus being primary sources. References 4,6 and 7 link to Wikipedia itself - Wikipedia is a tertiary source and can never be used as a reliable source in other article's. The rest of the references are secondary sources which are decent - weren't it for the fact that there is no mention of "Sainath Dukkipati" anywhere in those. If i try a google search for "Sainath Dukkipati" there is literally nothing that even remotely qualify as a reliable source - so quite frankly i fear that this article is pretty much a lost cause as far as acceptability goes. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 16:54, 5 January 2013 (UTC) exciral i got many reliable sources and posted few now if you want you can even do google search and once its reviewed and it becomes an article i'll add the filmography section of his after talking to the vogue magazine.Now you can view the sources and check it.Then I'll even add all the other sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.145.177 (talk) 02:56, 6 January 2013 (UTC) AFC Script Just wondering...When a user manually puts an article under review, can the AFC Helper Script overwrite that? This is what seems to have happened here; I put the article under review (manually, of course) looked over it. Finding that it was not written in English, I went to decline it, but found that you already had. Please don't get me wrong, I don't really care that I didn't get the point; just wondering. --Jakob 20:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Yes, it can indeed do that. As long as a page has an open AFC template (With "Open" being "Not declined or accepted") it will simply override any "In review" templates and place the decline template. If a review is no longer open when someone tries to review a page, the script will report an error stating there are no open templates. Eg: (User1 loads page) => (User2 marks as Reviewing) => (User1 declines page) => Page Declined (User1 loads page) => (User2 declines page) => Page Declined => (User1 declines page, not having seen the new revision) => User1 receives an error. The behavior is actually more or less as intended. If someone would mark the page as "Reviewing" they wouldn't be able to use the script to accept or decline a page afterwards if it wouldn't override in review templates. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 20:53, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Alright, thanks for clearing that up! --Jakob 22:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC) The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs Hello, Hope you are well. The article I submitted for The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs (an academic journal) was not approved due to a lack of secondary sources. It is located here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/The_Fletcher_Forum_of_World_Affairs&oldid=531394070. However, there are several other similar academic journals which have a Wiki page but do not have secondary sources, such as: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAIS_Review http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_Journal_of_World_Affairs Could you let me know how to proceed? Thanks, Mirza — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mramic (talk • contribs) 14:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Hiyas there Mirza, The articles you linked were made back in 2006 and 2005 respectively. Back then the policies for content were different, and the amount of manpower to check each article was lower as well which is the reason why there article's are actually around (If they were submitted trough AFC these days they would be declined using the same rationale as well). Having said that the fact that other stuff exists is not a valid argument for keeping more-of-the-same. . As for the article - you will want to add reliable sources to it that can verify the content in the article itself. These reliable sources are also used to determine if an article can be considered notable enough to be included on Wikipedia. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 17:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Hello again, Thanks for the quick reply. Sure, I wasn't suggesting the argument for keeping more of the same - I just didn't know that the Wiki conditions for posting articles had changed, and it was more of a matter of fairness. But either way, thanks for clarifying. I guess I'm a bit confused about how to meet the reliable sources requirement for an academic journal - it is unlikely that someone would write about the journal itself, but rather there would be articles about the articles the journal publishes. It just seems a bit unrealistic expecting academic journals to provide such sources that verify its own existence, since what interests people are the journal's articles, and not so much the journal itself. Do you have suggestions for how this can be remedied? Thanks for your help. Mirza — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mramic (talk • contribs) 17:29, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Interband Cascade laser Thank you for approving and creating the page "Interband cascade lasers." I was wondering if you could change the title to "Interband cascade laser" (i.e. singular), but still have "en.wikipedia.../interband_cascade_lasers" redirect to the page. Thanks.  Done - The page is now at interband cascade laser, while interband cascade lasers redirects to that page. Oh, and it might be a good idea to mention this: Since your is autoconfirmed you have the userright to move pages yourself as well. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 00:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Grand Prince Royal Jinan Dear, Excirial. I find your action to deny my submission absolutely preposterous. Please, take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Hyoryeong . They have submitted the same way, and they were able to submit their article and I cannot? Who sets the justice in Wikipedia? I find this unfair. There is scarce amount of English information to quote from about Grand Prince Royal Jinan. If you guys want to raise the bar, then you guys need to start translating the works of Korean documents yourselves. Please, accept my article as many more of Korean Princes’ articles have been successfully submitted this way. Lee, Jyong Chul. Founder and CEO The Korean Monarchy and the Korean Royal Armed Forces Korea Reunification Party (22nd in line House of Grand Prince Royal Jinan) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpotDays (talk • contribs) 18:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Hello there SpotDays, I declined the page because the article quotes Wikipedia directly. As a tertiary source Wikipedia is not a valid reference for an article to be based on. The Prince Hyoryeong has exactly the same issue, but since it was added to the mainspace directly without going trough articles for creation it was never reviewed for quality. That however, doesn't mean that it doesn't suffer from the same problem. Having said that - References don't need to be in English to be used on the English Wiki (Only the prose in the needs to be written English). You can simply cite the references from the Korean page (Though if a good quality translation of the references exists, that is preferred for readabilities sake). The only thing that is requested as a courtesy is that non-english are cited using the citation template, with the language parameter filled in (So that editors can see the sources are in a different language without having to open them). Kind regards, Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 18:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Dear, Excirial. Thank you very much for your excellency. I will do my best to continue to improve the article. Since it is in the open space now, people will be able to add or edit as necessary. Thank you for taking a big step forward. Lee, Jyong Chul. Founder and CEO The Korean Monarchy and the Korean Royal Armed Forces Korea Reunification Party (22nd in line House of Grand Prince Royal Jinan) Austin Dog Alliance Hello. I am a volunteer for Austin Dog Alliance and created this page with their permission. You commented: "In early 2013, the Alliance will begin offering classes for youth aged 15-19 with disabilities that focus on preparing" => http://austindogalliance.org/ (Entire section is copied literally) "In addition to founding Austin Dog Alliance and leading the growth of the organization as Executive Director" => http://austindogalliance.org/training/our-training-team/ (Entire Leadership section is a very close paraphrase from the website. Lines are either identical or differ one or two words - no change in structure) Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 19:47, 5 January 2013 (UTC) What evidence do you require to allow me to use this information? Thanks! lpw 20:29, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Laura — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laura P Wright (talk • contribs) Hello there Laura, Copyright laws don't permit copying content that is marked as being copyrighted directly to Wikipedia(Nor is copying content that isn't specifically marked by a license allowed). Only when content is released specifically under a license allows this (Such as when a page is licensed under CC-BY-SA) it can be copied word for word - in other cases it is a copyright violation. You can, however, use a page as a basis for writing your own text by paraphrasing it. Note that simply changing a word or two is not enough in that case. Having said that it is rarely a good idea to use text from an external source directly, as it is rarely written in a way that can be considered encyclopedic. The page you write had the same issue - it was not neutral in several places, and its writing and general structure also had some issues because of that (For example the Leadership section. that took up half the article - this biographical information doesn't belong in a page detailing an organisation). What i would advice is gathering reliable sources, and writing an article based on the content of these sources in self-written prose. You may also want to have a look at the Good Article category - the article's in that category and have been checked for their quality, making them excellent examples to model an article after. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 18:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Page creation review for Entertainment Media Research Digital Hi, first of all happy new year! And of course, thank you for reviewing my first (ever!) created Wikipedia page. You have mentioned that most of the sources do not mention Entertainment Media Research. This is not true, as I specifically selected articles that specifically mention EMR. People and publications often tend to quote research but not the people who did it! The references I used all mention Entertainment Media Research. Here's the list with more detail: 1. The Guardian Newspaper: http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/oct/13/netmusic-musicindustry "Entertainment Media Research" is mentioned in paragraph 2, line 3 as well as in paragraph 6, line 4. In fact the whole article in the paper is about EMR and EMR's research. 2. Music Week: http://www.musicweek.com/news/read/future-of-cd-safe-thanks-to-downloading/026964 "Entertainment Media Research" is mentioned in paragraph 2, line 1 and paragraph 4, line one. Again the entire article is about EMR and the work they do. 3. Another article on Music Week: http://www.musicweek.com/news/read/pirates-could-be-subscribers-claims-report/042700 "Entertainment Media Research" is mentioned in paragraph 1, line one and paragraph 10, line 1. Again the entire article is about EMR and the work they do. 4. Music Tank (A serious site run by the University of Westminster who have a superb music faculty): http://www.musictank.co.uk/resources/speaker-biographies/russell-hart "Entertainment Media Research" and the CEO has earned a dedicated profile/bio page for their notable contribution of research to the music industry. 5. WPP: http://www.wpp.com/wpp/press/press/default.htm?guid=%7Bb36afd70-a29f-4148-a1fd-0450c08d121e%7D "Entertainment Media Research" is mentioned in paragraph 6. 6. I have included one of EMR's latest surveys as this material is used by university students for dissertations and other serious works. This is a major EMR's survey report and "Entertainment Media Research" is mentioned on page 2, page 4 and page 125 (see credits). I would have thought people on Wikipedia (particularly students and industry people) targeting the EMR page would have found this survey truly very useful. 7. Radaris: http://radaris.co.uk/p/Peter/Ruppert/ I quoted Radaris as it has a very comprehensive profile of the company and one of the major personalities behind the company. (I read the Wikipedia terms, and I understand we can't quote the official company site, hence I went for Radaris) 8. Rassami: http://www.rassami.com/snapshots.html "Entertainment Media Research" has its own section and its written about quite comprehensively. Starts on paragraph 9 from the top. 9. sk-kultur.de: http://www.sk-kultur.de/dancescreen99/english/e_pre_4e.htm - I have quoted this source because (although not very pretty), this seems like a serious site - from what I understand (I used Google translate), they work with government funded projects and subsidies and help artists with funding, research and support. I understand this is like a government/culture site, so it should be a very good reference. I quoted Peter Ruppert from this source who is the founder of EMR. 10. I also quoted Peter Ruppert's profile on Linked In as that has a very good Summery of Entertainment Media Research as well as the founder. However, I can remove this if this is deemed inappropriate. The only mistake that I have done (just realised!) is with the reference of the Common Sense Media article, where they used "entertainment media" phrase a lot in their article and I got that confused with "Entertainment Media Research" name - I am happy to correct this by removing it. I would've thought that most of the sources I used (including newspapers, universities and government sites) would be deemed as reputable sources. I have quoted research because that's what the company does - they provide research intelligence, and this reseach is used by academics and industry people throughout a very large portion of the world. Like I mentioned at the beginning, this is my first post, and perhaps the referencing format is not perfect, and whatever else, but I don't mind learning how to fix that. I happy to learn how to edit Wikipedia and I would be happy to receive any guidance from you. However, please do reconsider this submission as I have referenced reputable sources and they all mention Entertainment Media Research. The company is well known in the industry for providing insightful, useful and reputable research and universities encourage students to quote this research in their dissertations. I look forward to hearing from you, and thank you for taking the time to read this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marijhaa (talk • contribs) 12:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC) "The Vic & Helen Show" article Dear Excirial, I'm asking (in good faith) in regard to my declined submission of an article dedicated to documenting a web-created sitcom, (The Vic & Helen Show.) (At this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/The_Vic_%26_Helen_Show) I would first like to clarify that I am NOT the owner of said sitcom; I have been given permission by the owner (Richard Thripp) to write an unbiased and informative documentation of the series, for encyclopedic means. Wikipedia, in my opinion, is the best option there is. I would also like to make known that I just turned 15, and am not much of a tech wiz. (My vocabulary is advanced, since my mother is an English teacher, but I digress.) I was, of course, disappointed in the rejection, especially since I had devoted at least 4 hours to writing, proofreading, and checking references for the cause. To get to the point, I would like to kindly ask you how I was not specific in listing references. Why was this so? It is important in this case to note that there are really not several Web sources to get these references from. Given that the show being documented is relatively small, (absolutely NOT to say it isn't worth documenting,) the number of Web sources are limited to the actual website, (http://vicandhelen.com/) and the YouTube channel, (http://youtube.com/procommenter/) BOTH of which contain all information about the series, as posted by no less than the actual creator. Basically, what I am saying is that I see no reason why the references I gave did not seem credible. I am desperately asking for clarification! What could I have done better? I would very much appreciate if you reconsider, or at least get back to me. I spent a lot of time and effort, devoted to this cause, as it is very important, and certainly noteworthy. Thank you, very much for your time, and I look forward to hearing back from you. - JTProductionsWiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by JTProductionsWiki (talk • contribs) 18:38, 5 January 2013 (UTC) Classical Schrödinger Equation Real, per [1]. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 19:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC) [2] too. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 19:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Not sure what else I need Our little museum -Glenn Martin Museum- has been around for 20 years, but never had a wiki page. I have been thinking about doing one for 2 years. So I tried. I am on the board & a volunteer and I am trying to get a wiki page for the museum. The museum shows up RED in many other wiki pages. I have cited our web page, as many other small museums do. I am not sure what else you want to see as ref to prove we are a real museum. I plan to add pictures of our planes, but I wanted to get the basics up first. Maybe my format is wrong, not sure what else you need or want. Thanks! GLM789TC (talk) 22:08, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Urgent Admin Abuser Dear, Wikipedia. I am a Founder and CEO of The Korean Monarchy and the Korean Royal Armed Forces Korea Reunification Party. I had some really nasty interaction with Wikipedia administrator Qwyrxian. This user is abusing administrator power to block every single Wikipedia account that I am making. Please, unblock my capability to talk to other administrators. Please, help me. Also, he is destroying my article of Grand Prince Royal Jinan. Lee, Jyong Chul. Founder and CEO The Korean Monarchy and the Korean Royal Armed Forces Korea Reunification Party (22nd in line House of Grand Prince Royal Jinan)