User talk:The Anome/archive 8

Please add new comments to the bottom of this page.

Moved old talk to

Work in progress

The following is the result of taking Wikipedia's category links and the NIMA GNS data, and rubbing vigorously. With quite cautious checks applied to both datasets, this gives an unambigious location for 12660 out of a possible 28628 (44%) articles about non-US cities, towns and villages.

The results are sorted by country, then place, and binned into four files. They have also been compared to the data in Koordinaten_en_CSV.txt (see [1]), and labelled by whether they are new coordinates (NEW), or duplicate coordinates already in articles (dup), and, if so, whether they are exact duplicates, or if not, roughly how many km out they are. (The distance calculation uses several approximations, so treat it only as an order-of-magnitude figure).

User:The Anome/Geodata 1: countries A-F
User:The Anome/Geodata 2: countries G-I
User:The Anome/Geodata 3: countries J-M
User:The Anome/Geodata 4: countries N-Z

Experimental data, please do not use:

User:The Anome/Geodata test (25km tolerance) These data points are more questionable: GNS has more than one point for this name in the relevant country, but they can all fit within a 25km diameter circle. There are 149 of these.
User:The Anome/Geodata differences en:GNS gt. 10km These data points have data both in Koordinaten_en_CSV.txt and the GNS. The figure given is the approximate distance between the two coordinates given, using an approximation that is only good for short displacements. Only points with an discrepancy of greater than 10km are listed.
User:The Anome/Geodata - outliers gt. 100 km: just the 117 outliers from the above with differences of > 100km between the datasets. These are roughly 3.2% of the set where distance can be calculated. A random selection from these should be manually checked for QC purposes.

See User:The Anomebot2 for more details.

Wikipedia:WikiProject on Adminship/a la carte

I agree.

One of the things that became clear as I wrote Wikipedia:WikiProject_on_Adminship/Role_of_admins is that the relative importance of the various technical abilities of admins has undergone huge shifts over time. Perhaps this has stopped, but I doubt it -- look at the changes in the relative importance of things due to the use of RC patrolling software. I don't think we can reliably predict how this will change in the future and accordingly believe that any changes in adminship process should reflect the fact that we're trying to select people we trust rather than following a security-driven "principle of least priviledge" model.

All the best and thanks for weighing in. I know policy isn't really your thing but you're one of the few who has been here and can think in terms of the MeatBall:LongNow so I value what you do care to share.

The Uninvited Co., Inc. 03:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fleshlight revert

Apologies if my revert took out a valid edit of yours. Just having an ongoing battle with spam links on that page - sorry and regards -- Nigel ^(Talk) 07:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Khwaja Mir Dard

Hi. Sorry, I can't... I uploaded that image with no sense of Wikipedia policy, copyright, or style at almost the beginning of my existence here. Granted, I think it is probably PD because its trivial work (unless the font is special). But, I think your best best is to ask someone in Category:User hi-N since it's Devanagari... although... Dard would likely have written in Nastaliq... since that's the script more associated with Urdu. I think they best bet may be deletion of the image since it adds about nothing to the article. gren グレン 12:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bots

Can you tell me how to make a bot? Is it difficult to take care of bots?--S e an gorte r^{{mind a chat?} e@ CVU}

Bot2

I've approved your bot's trial run, see WP:RFBOT for details. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please take a look at this diff by your bot? Eugène van der Pijll 11:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for spotting that: I've now added a check for redirects, and that won't happen again. -- The Anome 12:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've now finished reviewing all the test edits, and I've caught a few other special cases where geotagging was alredy present indirectly, using the geolink, infobox, or placebox mechanisms. I've reverted those edits, and also added checks to prevent these from occurring again. -- The Anome 12:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I think the present preference is to put the {{coor title dm}} template at the bottom of the page. Eugène van der Pijll 11:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was working on the basis that a naive user might expect something at the top of the rendered page to be at the top of the article, but I can easily change the code to put it at the bottom. -- The Anome 12:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Geographical_coordinates#Templates, point 3. It's a small point. Eugène van der Pijll 12:51, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reference: I'll alter the code to put the template after everything but category and interwiki links. -- The Anome 13:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now done. I've also added several more checks against duplicate geodata being added, directly or indirectly via a template. -- The Anome 14:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to add another report about your bot. It's adding the coordinates template to articles about cities in Argentina which employ a composite infobox including a {{placebox-coor}} template. Please have it check for that first. It's OK for it to add it to articles that have no coords information, though someone will eventually move it into the placebox structure anyway. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 15:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the report! I've just fixed that -- see above. That edit was a one-off glitch whilst I tested the patch itself, by turning it off then on again. The bot now additionally checks for the presence of links to either Geographic_coordinate_system or http://kvaleberg.com/ in the rendered article, thus detecting any transcluded geolinks. This catches every template I've found so far. I've just re-run it, and it now detects Bragado correctly. -- The Anome 15:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a few ideas: I think all of the data that you have are cities (are you selecting only those from the GNS database?), so it would be helpful to add "type:city" to the template; and you can also add the country ("region=AR", etc.). This would for example be helpful for Stefan Kuehn's GoogleEarth files, which are categorized by type of feature and country. Eugène van der Pijll 20:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. They are, in order: from the GNS, with the same title as an article which is categorized as a city, from the same country the category links up to, if they are the only city of that name in the country, and the GNS has only one entry under that name. I've added the tag now: thanks for the pointer. -- The Anome 20:58, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The correct syntax is given at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Geographical_coordinates#Parameters. The region is specified using the ISO codes. E.g., this is a tag I've just added to an article: {{coor dms|51|28|10|N|4|59|5|E|type:city_region:NL}}. Eugène van der Pijll 21:07, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If your bot has finished with adding the new coordinates, you could add those properties (type:city and region:ISO-code) to the templates that are still missing them, for the articles that exactly match. I know I did not add them to a large number of articles on Dutch towns, which means they are now "uncategorized" in Stefan's kmz-file. Eugène van der Pijll 15:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Data files now regenerated from new database dump, with approximately 1000 new articles listed. -- The Anome 11:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the caps!

Carfiend 01:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So why are there many articles listed here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Upcoming_albums ? Shawn88 12:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC) Please not that I am Sarah Ziegler as refered to below, the meterials I authors and have copy rights to. I would like to put this meterials up. Do not see how I would be violating my own copyright. If you would like to email me that would be fine sarahziegler@mheresearchfoundation.org "Hello Sarah, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions to the Osteochondromatosis, Multiple article, but various excerpts from it appear to be be taken verbatim from other sources, and we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words.[reply]

Alternatively, if you are the copyright holder for that material, and in a position to licence it under the GFDL for use on Wikipedia, please let me know on my talk page. (I note that you have the same name as Sarah Ziegler, the National Director and Coordinator of Research of the National MHE Registry -- if you are, you should know that we particularly welcome the input of expert authors and editors.)

For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! -- The Anome 23:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)"

Re copyrights

Dear Anome could you please call me on the toll free phone number not sure where you would like me to post the information you requested.1- 877- 486- 1758 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahziegler (talk • contribs)

Not sure how to redirect but you redirect Diaphyseal aclasis and Osteochondromatosis to Hereditary Multiple Exostoses. I would be happy to keep Hereditary Multiple Exostoses up dated and expand this as well. I just need alittle time as in the middle of writting 3 sets of research project paperwork and will be giving a presentation at a research conference. Thanks Sarah — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahziegler (talk • contribs)

Done. -- The Anome 01:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking policy

Hey. You recently deleted a patent nonsense article, and agreed with me that the author contributed nothing but nonsense to Wikipedia. I guess my question is, why is (seemingly) nothing done about these users? I've only been active on Wikipedia for a few days, but already I've seen many many users who have contributed nothing but nonsense, and have not been blocked once. Is the blocking policy this strict, or is it something else? Thanks, Fopkins | Talk 00:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's blocking policy is better characterized as pragmatic, rather than as lenient or strict. Usually, most vandals are people new to Wikipedia who do it once, submitting a series of silly edits, see them get deleted, and never come back again, as the experience was less fun than they thought it would be. In these cases, there's not much point in blocking them. Surprisingly often, some of them will come back later, and start to contribute constructively, and that's to be welcomed.

If they do come back and continue the same behaviour, we usually issue a couple of standard further warnings, and then block them if they don't stop. Even then, we don't usually ban for more than a day or so for first offenders, and allow them at least a couple more tries at editing, applying progressively longer blocks before they reach the end of the process with a permanent block. The reason for this apparent leniency is that we try to assume good faith as a matter of policy.

In really blatant cases of premeditated vandalism, however, administrators have the discretion to just block users indefinitely on sight without warning. Indeed, users may be indefinitely blocked before they make their first edit if they certain types of username which are well known to herald deliberate vandalism.

You might be interested to read the block log to see just how many blocking is actually done. -- The Anome 00:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the speedy reply, and the post on my talk page. I get your point, and agree with the good faith policy. It is surprising to me that users you have described actually come back at a later date and contribute constructively, I guess it will be good to see that firsthand eventually. I think I will read that page; I'm very interested in how Wikipedia is not run over by vandals. Fopkins | Talk 01:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is many blocks, often multiple blocks / minute, but considering the traffic that comes through Wikipedia, I am semi-surprised it is not more still. Fopkins | Talk 01:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current events problem

I saw you were trying to fix the problem at Portal:Current events/August 2006. Don't bother. Apparently, some change has recently been made that is wreaking havoc with pages that use templates many times. See this Bugzilla ticket. Hopefully they'll get things fixed soon. -- tariqabjotu 13:00, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

rdr over article

Why did you reduce Civil rights movement to a Rdr on top of over 50 edits dating back to March 2002 -- even if the rdr were not to a title ruled out by WP:NAME#Lowercase second and subsequent words?
--Jerzy•t 03:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because all the edits from the end of January on were based on a copyvio from Encarta, and there was a good, free, article already at the redirect destination. What was there prior to the copyvio was stubby [2], and seemed to me to already be covered in the better, longer, article. Renaming the article there to the correct title is easy, but I didn't do it at the time. -- The Anome 08:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've now move-over-deleted the good article to the good title: I didn't see any point in keeping the edit history of the stub. -- The Anome 08:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds reasonable, tnx. I'll clean up the talk-page aspects of it.
--Jerzy•t 09:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bondage hood article

The images in the article illustrate relevant text in the article and serve a descriptive purpose. I have revised the "fair use rationale" and licensing for the "Hells Belles" image. The size of the images are proportionate to the spacing of the paragraphs, so that the text of the article looks neat and orderly on the screen with the images. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaiwills (talk • contribs)

Place locations in western australia

The bot is placing coords between the stub and cat, sort of an odd place? It's like not where you'd expect to see the coordsSatuSuro 13:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's the place recommended by the Geographic coordinates Wikiproject people, after I discussed this with them. -- The Anome 13:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well thats daft as in manually provided co-ords in many locations in australia - it is either embedded in the text in the first line after the place name, or even in top right corner?

I'm not putting down your bots marvellous work, but feel bewildered that all the manuualy inserted coords will have to be moved? SatuSuro 14:16, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, there's no need to touch the manually-entered coordinates: if an article contains any existing geodata information, the bot will not touch it; it checks before each edit. At the moment, the consensus seems to be that it's OK to have lots of different formats, things can be fixed up later, since they all encode the same data in different machine-readable ways, and having the data is the important thing at this stage. Sooner or later, there will be a grand plan that will standardize all the different geodata formats, at which time more bots will probably do the work of standardizing all of the coordinate information. I don't knoiw if that's going to be in an infobox, at the top right, or something else: that's a policy issue for the future. By the way, even though the tag itself is located at the bottom of the article, the actual displayed coordinate is at the top right, in the same way as all the other articles tagged using the {{coor title dm}} template.

At the moment, my emphasis in this current run is simply to put reasonably accurate geodata into as many articles as possible that currently do not have any, both for its own sake, and so the other people working on Wikipedia's geodata projects can use it. -- The Anome 14:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making the effort to explain whats happening - all these places I have onm my watch list have been flowing past me today/this evening, your reassurance is a relief :) SatuSuro 14:26, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noticing your bot's excellent work on adding coords to Australian towns (watching many NSW locations). It is doing a great job :-) Thanks--Arktos ^talk 20:22, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not

I'm not using wikipedia for that! Well sure, i'm talking to wikifriends, but that's not why i'm loged on to wikipedia! I clean up, edit, create articles etc. If you want proof, go to the article bellard's formula and click history!Qmwnebrvtcyxuz 23:18, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your two edits to PiHex (the article you cited in your previous edit to this page) [3] appear to have been to add two pairs of brackets, and then to take them out again. Could you give me any examples of constructive edits you have made? -- The Anome 23:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You do seem to have made a contribution to Bellard's formula. Thanks! I'd really appreciate it if you could contribute more: you'll find that the more you contribute, the more you will feel a part of the larger community. -- The Anome 23:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sherlock Holmes you are not

I'm seriously questioning your cyber-forensic aptitude if you still think I have something to do with the mostly harmless S-Man and his clubhouse. All my edits are legit, and it's bewildering that you would go out of your way to disapprove of my choice to preserve the work of vandals on my user page. I would to see you retract the misguided and poorly reasoned aspersions you have cast on my good name.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 00:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies: I'm afraid you got wrongly caught up in the investigation regarding the other users. Please see my earlier posting to WP:AN/I where I stated that I was mistaken, and you appear legitimate. -- The Anome 00:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay. And I shouldn't have insulted your detective skills; I'm sure you're doing a fine job rooting out vandals and sock puppets. But I feel badly about what happened to S-Man. I feel responsible for his banishment, since it was the poorly received (but hilarious) joke on my User page that initially drew your attention to his behavior. I truly believe he means well.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 01:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cute 1 4 u

Why is it that you are deleting the user space pages (the user and user talk pages) for this user? I had placed the correct tags on the user page, but I am fairly sure that it is not the right thing to delete the user talk page, regardless of indefinite blocking. Ryūlóng 00:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The user claimed to be 11, and appears to have put a lot of personal information on their talk page. Either:

they actually are an 11-year-old child, in which case their personal information should be expunged from Wikipedia for their own protection, or
they are someone impersonating an 11-year-old, in which case their carefully-assembled 11-year-old's persona, which has been corresponding with other apparently very young children, needs removing from Wikipedia ASAP.

-- The Anome 00:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Qmwnebrvtcyxuz

Hi. Yamla told me that you are dealing with my friend Qmwnebrvtcyxuz. Is he blocked forever by you or did he leave Wikipedia. He left me a message and thanks to him or one of the administors I can't respond. Do you have a source of information to my question? --Bethicalyna2 00:25, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Bethicalyna2. I'm afraid that we don't let very young children, or people pretending to be very young children, to edit here. Sorry. -- The Anome 00:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, The Anome -- This is Randy Padawer (Wikipedia user: Padawer ... also of Psychology.net). The 8-year-old in question is my son, and his infraction is entirely my fault. I had no idea (again, my fault) that there was a minimum age provision for editing Wikipedia articles. He is an exceptionally smart rising third-grader, extremely interested in two topics he has edited on the site (anything to do with the number "Pi" and almost anything to do with astronomy). At first I monitored his activity closely (although I let him create his own account, alas), and then I gradually allowed more independent participation given the good behavior I witnessed. Please know that I will not allow him to have an account until he is old enough to do so (12?), and I will only allow him to edit something if it occurs on my account while I am sitting alongside directly supervising. My problem is that this block is indefinite and affects every account in our house, including my account. I have edited relatively ephemeral things here (items related to the early history of America Online [when it was called QuantumLink in the late 1980s, an entity whose community I had a hand in constructing] and items related to current news events from time to time). I enjoy this community, mostly reading, and I think I set an excellent example for my son -- despite the mistake regarding age limits, a mistake I will not repeat. A review of our history (by IP address and by ID) will reveal only well-intentioned participation, I believe. Would it be possible to lift the block so that I at least may continue to participate as before? If you would like me to document either my identity, my son's, our internet access, or anything else, I would be more than happy to oblige. If you need me to post (temporarily) email, telephone, or other contact information so that you can contact me directly, please let me know. Otherwise, if there is a contact at Wikipedia where I should initiate, please let me know that as well. Again, I apologize for my son, as this unfortunate outcome is due to my having failed to read the site's service terms, a matter I will also correct during the next few days. Appreciatively, and hopefully, Randy Padawer. (P.S. I am using my wife's AOL client in order to post this, and I hope I have not violated another policy as a result in turn.)

Hello Randy. Please see my reply on your talk page. -- The Anome 00:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RCU?

Hey, good work on the whole S-Man incident. So now I'm thinking that the next step should be a checkuser to see if the "children" are the same person. I'm thinking of checking S-man, Qmwnebrvtcyxuz, Cute 1 4 u, and Bethicalyna2. Get back to me if you think this is a good idea or if there are any users I missed. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 00:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a good idea. Could you also take a look at the various pages involved and see if there are any I've missed? -- The Anome 00:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced a checkuser will help. Many of these users claim to be editing from the same computer and to be (adopted?) siblings. They all edit from 71.231.130.56 (looking at the edit history on that IP shows at least one user account you have missed) but my point is that the checkuser would presumably just show that a number of them WERE editing from the same IP. That said, I have no idea who belongs with whom. It's all very confusing. --Yamla 01:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it can't hurt. I've listed the case, feel free to add any pertinent information I may have missed. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 01:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back

I can personally vouch for User:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back. He is not a sockpuppet of any of the other accounts you have raised concerns about. Email me if you have any questions. TacoDeposit 02:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I draw attention to TacoDeposit's latest edit on User:The Fat Man Who Never Came Back. Tyrenius 02:42, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See AN. Tyrenius 03:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah

Why did you delete my edit history? now my edit count has dropped no thanks to you it is not your uerpage it's mine so please restore it and add the edit history Abdullah Geelah 13:01, 21 August 2006 (UT

Please see my reply on your talk page. -- The Anome 13:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At least restore my edit history

I'm sorry, I can't do that without also restoring the text in question. However, please see your user page. -- The Anome 13:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question about your recent blocks

Can you direct me to any policy that states younger people are not allowed to edit here. I can see that you have blocked a number of users recently for being too young to edit. I have yet to see any such policy, and I thought the general consensus on ANI recently was that children should be allowed to edit if they do so productively. I am the first person to admit that I don't know about any of the individual people blocked. I can tell that some of the blocks seem to be due to vandalism related issues as well. But are all of these users vandals, or are they being blocked specifically for their age? Thanks. Ungovernable Force^{The Wiki Kitchen!} 21:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware, there's no formal age policy. However, this case was a common-sense judgment call: although it started as a concern about vandalism, it rapidly became apparent that these editors were real or apparent eight- or nine-year-olds online, posting their personal details in great detail. I did the minimum necessary to resolve the problem, as far as I could: I removed the the details, and locked their accounts to prevent further problems. As a result, I believe that their parents are now aware of the problem (see above) and are doing something about it. -- The Anome 21:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Anome, I appreciate your alerting me to the problem. My son claims he did not post any personal identifying information other than his first name (bad enough, in my estimation), so I appreciate your vigilance. He also vehemently and credibly disclaims vandalism, so I would appreciate if you have confirmed otherwise. Question: logging onto AOL as a proxy in order to fully participate is something I would rather avoid given the integrated browser's quirks on MacOSX (which include not being able to "sign" posts like this one using the "Sign your name" function below). I would certainly be open to a lengthy probationary period, or whatever you deem best as an alternative, but as the senior Wikipedia user in our family I would be grateful if you would consider relaxing the ban on our IP address. -- Padawer

Yes, certainly. I'll sort it out now. -- The Anome 00:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I've removed two autoblocks that were still extant. I hope that has sorted things out: if not, let me know, and I'll have another go at finding any remaining autoblocks. -- The Anome 00:20, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I very much appreciate your help. I just spent a moment reading this whole page at my son's behest. He pointed me to your generous comment from last night ("You do seem to have made a contribution to Bellard's formula. Thanks! I'd really appreciate it if you could contribute more: you'll find that the more you contribute, the more you will feel a part of the larger community."). So that I can supervise him as you would desire, would you allow him to continue editing specified topics under his account (and with my supervision)? We had a few tearful moments here last night, with my alternating between the understanding counseling parent and the accusative inquisitor. Needless to say, I want to encourage the considerable (and impressive, I think, given his age) intellectual exploration he evidences, but I also deeply respect the protocols which ensure this endeavor's continued good health. I would appreciate your consideration, and I will respect and adhere to whatever guidelines you issue. Thanks again. -- Padawer

Hello Randy. Please see my reply on your talk page. -- The Anome 00:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noted and answered. Your intervention was appreciated and will ensure far greater oversight. (I didn't know whether to answer you here or there. I'm afraid I am still very much a "user talk" novice. On a lighter note, I am happy to be typing this on a "real" web browser.) padawer 00:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay 1980 evil?

Hi Just wonduring, Why user Lindsay1980 is blocked? I dont think her age means anything. We are all wikipedians. I didnt understand what your reason to block her was. Why is she blocked?

regards

user: culverin 06:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

The situation is in the process of being dealt with, please see above. -- The Anome 20:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cute 1 4 U

Just to let you know, she's requesting an unblock, I'm passing on it, but you can do what you want. Yank sox 20:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please ask her to take it to WP:AN/I. Thanks! -- The Anome 20:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um...She can't considering she's blocked...But I'll post on ANI. Yank sox 20:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We're having a discussion at ANI about a possible unblock of Cute 1 4 u, and a suggestion of mentoring has been thrown out. Since you were the blocking admin, we feel you should voice your opinion. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 21:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've now commented there; I think this is now a matter for the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve. -- The Anome 22:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:The Anomebot2

All botflagged now :) -- Tawker 02:29, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You BLOCKED me?

Someone brought this to my attention. The Fat Man took a great deal of pride in his useful contributions and spotless record, and now it's ruined!!! How about some communication before blocking me legitimately, or an apology for blocking me otherwise? I know it was just for one minute, but, truly, I am permanently shamed. Thanks a lot.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 09:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't take it personally. It happened in the midst of trying to fix up a quite complex problem which initially appeared to be like coordinated multi-user vandalism, and I unblocked you almost immediately afterwards, as soon as I realised that your blocking was a mistake. See my comments in WP:AN/I, where I make it clear that you are a legimate user, and not implicated in any wrongdoing. -- The Anome 10:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pumpie has fewer blocks than me!--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 16:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UFC Spammer

I thought I would pass this on to an admin. It appears the sole purpose of existence for Jpblev and the IP address user:24.12.54.150 is to spam Wikipedia articles regarding mixed martial arts fighters. If their edits are actually legitimate, then I'll leave my complaint at that. Chicken Wing 03:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of towns and cities with 100,000 or more inhabitants

Just to let you know, I've done a bit of cleanup on the Canadian entries in this list. A few (Etobicoke, Gloucester, North York) simply don't exist anymore, having been merged into larger cities several years ago. A few were at the wrong name ("Chicoutimi-Jonquière" —> Saguenay; "Sudbury" —> Greater Sudbury). And except for a few of the largest and/or most uniquely named cities (namely Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Ottawa, Quebec City and Saskatoon), Canadian cities are otherwise always at "City, Province", not "City" or "City, Canada". Just thought I should let you know, so you didn't think it got vandalized the next time you look at it and see entries under Canada that you don't remember. Bearcat 03:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there another criterion you're using for addition to that list besides the population figure specified? Because you put quite a few Caribbean towns on it (Bridgetown, Cockburn Town, St. Johns, Antigua, etc.) that don't even have 10,000 people, let alone 100,000. Bearcat 03:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Capital cities were also listed. -- The Anome 08:48, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Holocaust

Hi Anome, thanks for correcting me on that point. I will stick with the slight rewording only. Regards,

Albester 11:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]