Jump to content

User talk:Samuel Blanning

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Enigmasoftwaregroup (talk | contribs) at 20:51, 19 September 2006 (→‎Email). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

offline

Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.

Bookmarks
Category:Requests for unblock
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old
User:Samuel Blanning/Content review


I have more or less ceased to edit Wikipedia. Messages posted here will not be responded to.

Starbucks

Why did you remove the Enterprise template from the Starbucks talk page? Starbucks is an enterprise, and the template points to guidance on writing articles about enterprises. Why would we as editors want to ignore what little Wiki guidance there is on articles about ongoing enterprises? It is a proposed policy and if you've read that proposed policy you'll note it suggests we can add that template to any enterprise article. So, can you tell me how removing that template and the link to the proposed policy from the talk page will help us improve the article? Thanks! Mr Christopher 18:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The template describes Wikipedia:Articles about ongoing enterprises as a policy, which it isn't. It's as simple as that. Although anyone following the link will see that the policy is currently proposed, the template also summarises the proposed policy, so not everyone will follow the link. Please remove the template until the proposal has actually attained policy status. --Sam Blanning(talk) 19:38, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

help against vandals and personal attacks

how do i protect my discussion page from vandals and personal attacks with out blocking genuine users from contributing.--Lucy-marie 19:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

can you pleas block User:Gerrado from editing my talk page and discussion page as he has resorted to vandalism and personal atacks.--Lucy-marie 19:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your userboxes are, er, interesting in regards to how many languages you claim to speak fluently, but Gerrado was over the line in both of his comments. Unfortunately it's not possible to block users from specific pages, but I've warned him that civility isn't optional and if he keeps it up further action may be necessary. --Sam Blanning(talk) 19:44, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I know that I may have gone over the top on user boxes but I was merley experimenting and as It is my user page I think I have a right to post what ever user box like. Thank you for placing a warning on him I hope It dose the trick. Thanks Sam you are the best.--Lucy-marie 20:39, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have had to remove another Inflamatory personal attack from my talk page by the same user please take the apropriate action.--Lucy-marie 15:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Everybody is confused about Raymond

Do you watch the show Everybody Loves Raymond? It was one of the best shows during the time it was on. I recently created the page for the character Amy Macdougall-Barone. The problem is, most people know her as Amy Barone. I am not sure what her 'official' name is on the show. The title of the article was gotten from a link on the 'Everybody Loves Raymond' page. It had a link to the 'Amy Macdougall-Barone' page, but there was nothing there so I started it. Here's my problem. I want 'Amy Barone' to link to 'Amy Macdougall-Barone.' So if somebody types in the first phrase, they get the article with the ladder for a title. But right now, the first links to the 'Everybody Loves Raymond' page. I think what I have to do is create an 'Amy Barone' page, and then make the only part of the article a redirect to my original page. But there's got to be a better way. Is there?

Free-encyclopedia 19:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You mean like this? Also, a similar redirect should probably be created from the wrong capitalization of MacDougall to the correct one. --tjstrf 20:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gerrado has somthing to say...

Ok, I'll come clean. It just did not seem realistic that you would have all those skills that is all. --Gerrado 19:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Post right about this has incorrect link

Amy MacDougall-Barone

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a great day! -- Underneath-it-All 00:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HAPPY FIRST EDIT DAY! from the BIRTHDAYCOMMITTEE

Wishing Samuel Blanning a very Happy First Edit Day!

Have a fantastic day!

From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee

Michael 03:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Template:User Nogus

Walk

Fourwentways found on internet: http://www.shelford.org/walk8.htm Regards Antiphus 10:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you....

Sorry to bother you, but, I noticed that you made a small profile on this website. I would like to know how to, I'm not that good on computers. If you feel like responding, could you leave a message on my [[User talk:Tishii|talk]? My username is Tishii.

You should sign your name with four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and timestamp. SoaP 16:36, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aaargh!

I want to do something on Wikipedia, I feel so helpless... SoaP 16:36, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for September 5th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Volume 2, Issue 36 5 September 2006 About the Signpost
Everyking desysopped Explicit images spark debate
Report from the Italian Wikipedia The English Wikipedia reaches 1,000 administrators
Voting begins in Board elections Wikipedia in the news
News and notes Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:SIGN

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Disney's Hilton Head Island Resort

Hi. As the closing admin for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disney's Hilton Head Island Resort, you might want to take a look at the article's recent history. Cheers, CWC(talk) 14:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it doesn't really have anything to do with me. AfDs do not make binding decisions on merges - the only decision made there is to keep or delete. Anything that follows is up to the participants as individual editors. Although I performed a simple merge on the basis of the AfD, anyone can still reverse it. It's up to those interested, which may include those who participated in the AfD, to come to a consensus on whether the page should be an article or a redirect. --Sam Blanning(talk) 14:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough! I'm not really interested in that particular article either, so I'll just forget about it. Sorry to bother you; thanks for the explantion. CWC(talk) 16:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Genocide

The Pro-choice article should be in the Genocide category if it is also in Human rights and Social justice category, otherwise there is a bias. I could find many sources which would consider genocide. If I get sources would it be able to remain in the genocide category? 75.3.50.41 23:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed Pro Choice from the Human rights and Social justice category, as it does is bias to have it in those categories. 75.3.50.41 23:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If Human rights and Social justice category are put in but Genocide category is not allowed to be put in, that would be a clear bias. It would take Pro Choice organizations as sources, but not allow Pro life organizations as sources. 75.3.50.41 00:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People are trying to readd Human rights and Social justice category back into the Pro-choice article, could you please back me up on this issue? 75.3.50.41 02:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for September 11th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Volume 2, Issue 37 11 September 2006 About the Signpost
Carnildo resysopped Report from the Hungarian Wikipedia
News and notes Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:SIGN

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Sheynhertz-Unbayg now completely blocked

I have just blocked all of his ISP's dialup ranges, see User:Kusma/Sheynhertz. I hope this means he's gone for six months and only complains about me on my German talk page. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 16:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very well done. --Sam Blanning(talk) 22:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

65.172.241.201

He's back, with similar vandalism, to Civil engineering, Athenian democracy, and Mariah Carey. The vandalism is similar to what you blocked him for in July. Diffs here and [2] and [3]. I've tagged him with blatantvandal-n., but I think an actual block is warranted. Argyriou 18:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've blocked the IP for 3 months. User warning templates should be substituted, by the way - use {{subst:bv}} rather than {{bv}}. --Sam Blanning(talk) 18:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda Dowler

The page you helped me to create and helped to show me how to inline citate in articles is now a "Good Article" and was passd on September 13th 2006. thank you for all you help with the article.--Lucy-marie 15:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I award you samuel blaning with the wiki thanks award for your help on the article.--Lucy-marie 22:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :-) --Sam Blanning(talk) 23:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Top gear

Please can you do one of two thing to the top gear article. Can you either block the anonomous user who is vandalising the page or semi protect the page a speedy resolution would be most apreciated, thanks.--Lucy-marie 20:55, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's the sort of vandalism that's difficult to diagnose because in cases like this I don't know which version is right - but given that several IPs have attacked that article in more blatant ways today it doesn't seem likely that they're good faith edits. And of course if you say they're misinformation vandalism I'm willing to take your word for it. I've semi-protected the article as various IPs have been attacking it, though you might consider posting {{verror}} on the last IP's talk page in case they try it elsewhere. --Sam Blanning(talk) 22:22, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rouge Admin?

Rouge admin award

As you have designated yourself or been designated a rouge admin you should be awarded the following award the Rouge Admin Award. So i oficialy award you with the roughe admin award.--Lucy-marie 22:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of myg0t talk page

Hi, I noticed that you deleted the talk page for the article on myg0t, with the reason being "DrV'd multiple times with no change", which is patently incorrect, because the last DrV was successful. Furthermore, the talk page is a piece of evidence for an RFA which is currently in progress. cacophony 23:45, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The last DRV was indeed successful, but I doubt in the way that you mean, because the page is still deleted. As for the RfA, while you haven't indicated which RfA you are referring to, I'm sure it will reach the proper conclusion without the evidence provided by the deleted history of an article on an insignificant community of bored nerds (or "hackers", if you must). --Sam Blanning(talk) 01:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The page is not "still deleted", it was restored and subsequently deleted. Also, The RFA in question is located here. cacophony 04:17, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, right, I thought you meant in a request for adminship. In that case it's even less of an issue, as all arbitrators have sysop status and can read the deleted history of articles. --Sam Blanning(talk) 11:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfC?

I noticed your comment in the MacDade Mall deletion review about RfC. I did not solicit Bwithh's comments, but his concerns mirror mine about the closing admin in the AfD for that article. I noticed the same pattern of incivility when reading his talk page. I'm seeking your counsel as to whether RfC is actually something I should pursue. I don't want to make an incident that was initially upsetting but is rather minor into a major distraction. At the same time, I don't want unchecked inappropriate behavior to mushroom. If you feel able to comment on this dilemma, I would be very pleased to have your input. Erechtheus 23:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether an RfC is justified - Sean is neither someone I have direct interactions with nor someone I particularly notice in passing. My main point was that DRV is the wrong place to start going over admin behaviour - I merely brought up RfC of an example of what might be the right place. My instinct would be to imagine filing the RfC and try to think what diffs I was going to put in the evidence section. If it seems difficult to compile because you can't think of any diffs that don't seem petty, it probably isn't justified yet. Obviously we don't want inappropriate behaviour to mushroom, but equally it's hard to imagine "I fear this user might become significantly uncivil" gaining many endorsements in an RfC. RfCs are by nature adversarial, so if you want to just let someone know how you feel then their user talk page is the best place. --Sam Blanning(talk) 00:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your advice. I'm now glad that I asked someone with better experience than I currently have with RfC instead of just agonizing over the matter alone. Erechtheus 00:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Np. --Sam Blanning(talk) 00:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Axam

Just wanted to note that the user had been warned twice (by two different editors) about 3RR, but then blanked his talk page, and continued the reverts. He has also been using personal attacks. Please see Wikipedia:Personal attack intervention noticeboard and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR. -- Jeff3000 00:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for letting me know. I've blocked him for 24 hours. --Sam Blanning(talk) 00:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think he's evaded his block by using another IP User:130.49.198.2 -- Jeff3000 01:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked the IP and left him a warning on the IP's talk page and his account's. If he keeps this up I'll be extending it, probably to indefinite as I don't see anything particularly useful from the account. His use of Arabic also disturbs me - I've asked another user for a translation of the phrases on his talk page. I may be going to bed soon (should, to be more accurate), so if my status goes to offline, try WP:ANI if he continues to evade his block. --Sam Blanning(talk) 01:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Edward Saint-Ivan

Hi,

There seems to be a problem at Carol Downer. User:Edward Saint-Ivan keeps reverting edits made by other editors to remove a reference Saint-Ivan wants to make to himself that doesn't have anything to do with the subject, really (and that goes to a website, not a WP:RS.) I left a 3RR warning for him on his talkpage, and I noticed that his whole talkpage is similar warnings (about 3RR, inserting OR references to himself, etc). He is fairly uncivil, and his edit summaries are like: "Tough!" and "I can cut and paste!" Should a 3RR be filed, or can something else be done to help him understand how to make useful edits to Wikipedia? Thanks, Cindery 00:50, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a pretty simple self-promotion case not much different from someone continually spamming external links. Blocked 24 hours, and if I see him continuing after it expires (and his stupid edit summaries don't give me confidence) I'll make it indefinite, as I see no useful edits at a quick glance. Mind you, this is simple enough that WP:AIV could probably handle it. --Sam Blanning(talk) 00:57, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Cindery 06:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Thomas Dunn

Hi-

I nominated Michael Thomas Dunn for deletion some time ago on the ground of non-notable subject, which led to subsequent nomination for the MTD Studios and other related articles by another user. You were the admin that finally closed the articles. Today, however, I see the Michael Thomas Dunn is back, and still without any verifiable information of notability, as are some of the other recently deleted articles. Would you mind looking into this? Tsimshatsui 02:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've deleted Michael Thomas Dunn and Alone and Restless. Are there any others? You can also tag reposts for speedy deletion (under CSD G4) by adding {{db-repost}} to the top. --Sam Blanning(talk) 02:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That seems to be it. And thanks for the tip. I'm still new at this. Tsimshatsui 02:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my "vandalism"

other half of this conversation is at User talk:132.241.245.245
The article as I found it included "A widely respected member of the Republican party" which is obvious pov. There are a number of other subtle things in the article that are pov. please return the article to a neutral POV. 132.241.245.245 02:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Samuel, many thanks for blocking that impersonator account. Unfortunately, a new one has since been created, called User:Neoconned. I'd imagine this is a sock puppet for the same individual. The new account has been used to vandalize my user page. I'm not going to bother with asking this new user to rename the account, as it so clearly is malicious impersonation and a retaliation for the previous block. Hence I'm coming straight here. I'd very much appreciate it if this one could be blocked too. Hopefully the individual concerned will get bored after a few blocks and give up! Cheers, --Neoconned 14:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked. Often WP:AIV will give you a faster response on malicious accounts this obvious. --Sam Blanning(talk) 14:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion/Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny (2nd nomination)

Thank you for the elucidating opinion that accompanied the (not to) delete decision. It was most informative. --Dwiki 21:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Sam Blanning(talk) 22:47, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for September 18th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Volume 2, Issue 38 18 September 2006 About the Signpost
"Citizendium" project aims to rival Wikipedia Report from the Simple English Wikipedia
News and notes In the news
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:SIGN

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Reply on meta

I have replied on my talk page. - Amgine 18:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Email

FYI, I've sent you an email. JoshuaZ 20:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enigma

Samuel

We feel that you unfairly deleted our article. Most of the people who commented on that discussion did not have all of the facts, and or their comments had been made before the article was edited. Our company clearly meets the requirements on WP:CORP and the last form was written as a stub with a complete Neutral Point of View

Please explain how we failed to satisfy WP:CORP

or for what other reason you deleted it.

Thanks, Enigma Software Group

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Samuel_Blanning&oldid=76655666"