User talk:Weirdoactor

This user's boss likes to come up with "work" for this user to do that is (unfortunately) non-Wikipedia related...CURSES!!! Thusly, he may not respond swiftly to queries.

For the sake of continuity, and for the sake of my (alleged) sanity:

If you leave a message on my talk page, I will respond on my talk page.
Conversely, if I leave a message on your talk page, I will watch your talk page, read your response, and respond there. Thanks!

You may start a new topic if you wish. Please sign your message (by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~), or I'll make you clean litter boxes for a week. Yes. Dirty, smelly litter boxes.

Please Read: As I do a lot of Counter-Vandalism editing, I am aware that I will be targeted by vandals and their various sock/meat puppets. Such persons should note that I have a zero tolerance policy for personal attacks or harassment posted here (or anywhere, for that matter). Such posts will be removed and reported to the appropriate authority. Thank you in advance for your cooperation, and please do try and have a truly Wikilicious day.

Mary Peters

Peters is not officially the 15th secretary, but I intended the italics to mean that if confirmed she will be (so it was a conditional 15). Otherwise it may appear that Peters falls under or between Mineta like Cino. I don't know for sure Wikipedia's policy, guideline, or practice on this, but sice it is not a crystal ball, I deleted the 15 after reading your question. Also, despite what I wrote in the article, I don't think it's right to say that her nomination is pending. Bush nominated her yesterday, but her ascension to the seat (there must be a better way to say that...) is pending Senate confirmation. Thanks for your question. Does this answer it? Minutiaman 12:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC-4) (and in case you were wondering in reading this page's edit history I forgot to sign my first edit a moment ago)

It does. Thanks! And there should be a better way of saying "acension". Maybe "pending confirmation"? Weirdoactor 13:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC-4)

Your edit to Talk:Halloween

Greetings, Weirdoactor. While I can understand that provocation can bring out the worst in all of us, Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. Please remember that attacks are not tolerated at Wikipedia, under any circumstances. Thanks. :) Justin Eiler 00:11, 31 October 2006 (UTC-5)

I understand your point of view, and I appreciate your comment. Weirdoactor 10:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC-5)

Hello Weirdoactor, please discuss any changes you make at the talk page. The topic has been discussed at lenght and a consensus has been formed which lead to a well balanced article. Specify, in what way you disagree with the content of the article before removing other peoples's text. Also, I ask you to revert the first level warning you misused. A misuse will not be tolerated in Wikipedia. Please read the guidelines for using this template. Do not use it against the people who try to contribute valuebly to Wikipedia. Please read the discussion to this controversial issue at the talk page. This is a reasonable basis for everyone. Thanks. Caloon2000 15:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC-5)

You must have me confused with someone who fell off the turnip truck last night, dude. You certainly know a lot of Wiki policy and lingo for a newbie. Methinks you are a meatpuppet, and I will report you as such to the proper authority. I calls them like I sees them; if you don't like that, difficult mammary. -- Weirdoactor 15:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Your message regarding the Vandalizer 24.60.119.106

Hi there, I too am confused why 24.60.119.106 has still not been blocked. However you must realize I am not an administrator :P. I just try as best as I can to edit vandalism where ever I see it. Maybe it would be beneficial if either you or myself report this IP to an administrator.¤~Persian Poet Gal 16:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC-5)

Ah. Gotcha. You're like me, a deputy. We need to tell a marshal. I've reported the IP to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, but nothing has been done. If you have any suggestions, it's obvious to me from your contributions and your user page that you're a lot more experienced with this sort of thing than I am...let me know how I can help. Thanks! Weirdoactor 16:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC-5)

Caloon

The caloon matter is not a matter of simple vandalism. I suggest you take it to WP:ANI if there is a continuing issue. JoshuaZ 15:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Will do. Thanks! -- Weirdoactor 15:18, 1 November 2006 (UTC-5)

I do however suggest that both of you try to calmly discuss the matter on the talk page and be careful of the 3 revert rule. JoshuaZ 15:48, 1 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Discussion doesn't seem to be their forte. I smell a meat/sock puppet, and have reported as such. I will not revert the article again. -- Weirdoactor 15:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Re:Your edits to Halloween

It may merit a section if it can be expanded more, but as it stood it was about two sentences long with the admission that Halloween isn't very important in the Caribbean. I think that the section should mostly cover the places where Halloween is most widely observed because more can be written about them. Perhaps instead of adding a section for every obscure country/region in the world, we can add an "elsewhere" section to the page for that type of information.

And yes, I've been known to spell things wrong occasionally, I am human :-). Please correct anything you may see. - Mike | Happy Thanksgiving 17:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC-5)

RfC on Keltik31

Thank you for starting the RfC on this user. Anti-Semitism and users who push only POV have no place on Wikipedia. I commented on the RfC. It's pretty consistent with yours. Again, thank you! --Db099221 20:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Your comments on my talk page

If you didn't see my response there: You said, among other things, "Example: "Other Christians get very emotional about Halloween, rejecting the holiday because they believe it trivializes the occult and what they perceive as evil"."

My response: Interesting. I didn't perceive the "emotional" thing as POV. Thanks for your input. How about if we change it to "concerned". The "rejecting the holiday because they believe it trivializes the occult and what they perceive as evil" was already there; I didn't write that bit. Feel free to change it, or I will if you prefer. Thanks again for your work on the article [and the related issues]. --Kathryn NicDhàna 17:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Thank you for your kind words. And actually, you don't have to be an admin to hand out barnstars] :-) --Kathryn NicDhàna 15:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC-5)

False NPA Report by Caloon2000

- I'm curious about how asking an obvious liar (who uses said lies as a defense of their vandalism and multiple violations of the three revert rule) about their religious obligation *not* to lie is an "attack", or indeed, "offensive". Was it slightly ad hominem? Perhaps. But I thought it a valid point to bring up, when comparing Caloon2000's actions with their professed beliefs.

- I brought up the possibility that Caloon2000 was a meat/sock puppet (based on the new user's odd grasp of Wikipedia policy and lingo); but I never said "YOU are a meat/sock puppet". I've made an appropriate report about my suspicions to the proper authority, but that's all.

- Multiple? I've used that template once; and it was not a misuse, as I understand policy. I might be wrong; if so, please correct my misconception. The template was used in good faith to warn an obvious vandal with multiple bad faith edits/reverts over a very short period of time.

In closing, I'd like to point out that this report by Caloon2000 is in fact an obvious retaliation for my reporting his/her violations; and does not even meet the minimum criteria for a report of this type, as I have never been warned for making a "personal attack" on Caloon2000 (from the report page: "The editor must have been warned with the npa2, and npa3 templates as appropriate. Reports of unwarned editors may be removed.") Obviously, this report should be removed and ignored on that basis alone, not to mention my aforementioned reasons. Thank you. -- Weirdoactor 08:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC-5)

I would add to this that Caloon2000 has twice placed unwarranted vandalism templates on my talk page, in retaliation for my reporting his 3RR violations. Every time I warn him not to remove warnings or postings from his talk page, he retaliates with another false accusation. --Kathryn NicDhàna 15:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Keltik31

Hi, Keltik31 has been blocked for 24 hours. Addhoc 15:12, 2 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Thank you for your assistance! Am I allowed to give barnstars? Probably not... -- Weirdoactor 15:15, 2 November 2006 (UTC-5)

it was via this dubious page & highly objectionable comment that i encounter this oh so lovely user. it bothers me so i report it somewhere, & am told we have to wait until he is personaly offensive again. i'm newish here, is there no specific policy against hate speech per se? u seemed like u might know these things. thx in adv →bsnowball 07:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC-5)

He was recently blocked for 24 hours, and hasn't done anything naughty (or at all) since. Let's hope he either comes back and is a productive NPOV editor, or stays away. I hope that helped. -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 21:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC-5)

duh, stupid me, had noticed that then forgotten & started misreading as this month again. thx. sorry to bother u. → bsnowball 03:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC-5)

I have started the RfC process for Keltik31, and I would appreciate your comment on my request here, so that my request can meet the two-person threshold. Thank you! BTW, thanks for listing me as a Wikifriend. I consider you the same. --Db099221 18:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Done! Let me know if I did that incorrectly. Thanks for your help and friendship! -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 11:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC-5)

RE: Jay-Z

Oops! I put the wrong link, it should've been Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Pseudonyms.2C_stage_names_and_common_names. It's very clear there that the full name should be first followed by the pseudonym most associated with the person. --Zimbabweed 17:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Userbox

Hi, Weirdoactor,

I took the liberty of adding a userbox to your userpage. I figure after the Keltik31 stress, more levity (and More cowbell) would be a good thing. :) Justin Eiler 17:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Jay-Z

Thank you for your message - I must try harder. As ever, the continuing changes to Wiki policy leave me in their wake. In fact, the so-called "help pages" are, to me, full of Americanisms; journalistic; overly linked; prone to long-speak; that I quickly fall asleep reading any of them. I was merely trying to enhance the article - I do understand the potential vandalism issues. (Honestly, I am a good guy - old and misguided - but basically meaning well). Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore 18:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Sorry it took me so long to respond to your kind message; and yes, you did mean well, no question! The reversion was in no way a criticism of your edit; merely a "course correction". Please continue to be bold! Thanks! -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 21:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC-5)

T.R.Knight/Luke MacFarlane

I am acquainted with both actors, and neither is secretive about their relationship. In fact, after Knight "came out" to People, the couple was featured in a photo spread in US Weekly. SFTVLGUY2 10:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC-5)

I moved your response and my response to your talk page, for consistency. -- Weirdoactor 11:03, 6 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Re: Thanks!

Thanks for your help blocking the link spammer in Luck (and several other articles). -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 17:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC-5)

No problem! Just doing my duty. Regards, (aeropagitica) 17:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Re: Thanks for your comments to 75.2.250.145

You can report your findings to WP:ANB or to WP:PAIN for investigation. I will post your comments to the noticeboards on your behalf. Regards, (aeropagitica) 18:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Much appreciated. I forgot to add that the user has been accused of being User:Joehazelton, a recently indefinitely blocked user. There's definitely a similar pattern to their edits and comments. -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 18:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC-5)

75.2.250.145 now reported. (aeropagitica) 18:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Thanks again. Sorry that it appears they are now targeting you. Ouch. That definitely was not my intention. -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 18:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Given recent events...

I thought you'd appreciate this tidbit on MPOV. Heee! --Kathryn NicDhàna 02:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC-5)

HA! Awesome. Thanks for the laugh! -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 02:07, 8 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Reporting Personal Attacks

What do you mean when you say, "Such posts will be removed and reported to the appropriate authority". Who do you report these posts to? --nkayesmith 03:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Not so much a "who" as a where. If it's "simple vandalism", one would report that here. -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 07:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC-5)

OK, thanks for the reply. --nkayesmith 20:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC-5)

External Linking

As you seem to be an experienced Wikipedia user, I am hoping you can help me clear up some questions that I have related to external linking on Wikipedia. I have also asked this question of other editors, and I am interested in anyone who has a response to this question, as I would like to understand the feelings and opinions surrounding this issue on Wikipedia.

I not only understand why linkspamming should be discouraged, but I agree that companies should not be able to edit their articles and change the point of view. And I can understand why adding links could be considered similar to changing the POV.

However, I truly believe that adding usable content (much like the way the official sites are almost always linked to under a corporate article) is a benefit to Wikipedia users. Therefore, there must be a way for corporate entities to let the Wikipedia editors and writers know about content that is useful to the article, even if the representatives cannot add it directly to the article themselves. The truth is that oftentimes companies are the authority on certain topics since it is the area in which they live and breathe.

In this case, I am suggesting a link to a web resource that has not been officially launched and therefore the public does not generally know that this resource exists. While I will certainly stay away from adding the link myself, I would like to do my best to let people know that this website exists. A heads up or sneak preview at something most people don't know about. However, in doing so, and suggesting the link on discussion pages for articles, I am met with discrimination simply because I am related to Diageo. The usefulness of the link is not considered for a second.

I hope that you can provide some insight, because at the moment it seems that the core of Wikipedia, which is providing useful and related information on all topics, is not being upheld by it's own editors and writers in an effort to exclude anything related to a company or organization.

Thanks.

--Jack The Bartender 11:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Jack, what you are describing is akin to astroturfing. I could no more help you (and Diageo) with your "problem" than I would help Wal-Mart. I am a firm believer in having no advertising of any kind on Wikipedia, be it obvious linkspam, or a more guerilla advertising method as you (and Diageo) are attempting here.

And by the by; the "core" of Wikipedia is not "providing useful and related information on all topics". That sounds more like the core, or purpose of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 11:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC-5)

Thanks for saying hi!

I'm happy to meet you. :) --Elar a girl^Talk|Count 00:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC-5)

My user page

Hey, thanks for fixing the redlink! Mind if I borrow some of your userpage stuff? :) |||||| E. Sn0 =31337= ^Talk 21:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC-5)

Go for it! RAID MY FRIDGE! W00t! -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 22:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC-5)

I can see we'll get along just grand! :D |||||| E. Sn0 =31337= ^Talk 22:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC-5)

==Page weirdness==

Oh, it's just some annoyed message from an anon. I speedied his vanity page of himself and he didn't appreciate it. Apparently he's relevant to the Chicago Fire (I bet =P). It sort of amuses me, so I haven't moved it or anything. Thanks though ^^; ♠PMC♠ 04:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC-5)

HagermanBot test

I'm not signing this. No. I'm not. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Weirdoactor (talk • contribs) 14:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC-5).

This is a minor edit, and I'm not signing it. Not at all.

This is not a minor edit, and I'm STILL not signing it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Weirdoactor (talk • contribs) 14:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC-5).

Three Cheers for HagermanBot! |||||| E. Sn0 =31337= ^Talk 14:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC-5)

Heh. I'm guessing that the bot ignores minor edits. I guess it would have to, huh? -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 14:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC-5)

To those watching my talk/userspace: please support Don't-give-a-fuckism

You can do so here, and by using the cool userbox below (template: {{User_DGAF}}.)

Template:User DGAF

Thanks! -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 00:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC-5)

==16==

Gets tiring, doesn't it? This is why I support registration to edit. :) E. Sn0 =31337= ^Talk 12:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC-5)

I've been vandalized by registered users; so that wouldn't help. I take it as a compliment to my vandal fighting skills. Har. -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 13:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC-5)

Regged users are easy: Simply indefblock and note the IP. Yeah, I love whacking vandals too, they make a nice chewtoy. E. Sn0 =31337= ^Talk 14:18, 8 December 2006 (UTC-5)

3RR doesn't cover vandalism

Hi. Thanks for reporting a vandal to AIV.

I just thought you might be interested that reverting vandalism doesn't fall under the 3RR.

Cheers, -- Where 21:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC-5)

I just hate having to break that rule, even for the common good. I figure if I have to go that far, an admin should probably be looking at the problem. Thanks! -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 21:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC-5)

Sorry about that. I didn't look into the edits enough before I removed the message from AIV. But I did look at it a tad afterwards and blocked the user a little before you left the message on my talk.

Sorry about the confusion. -- Where 02:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries; have a good one! -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 02:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes. I had hoped s/he would learn. Well, I reblocked for 6 months. Thanks for telling me! -- Where 00:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's my hope as well; that a few warnings and maybe even a block can turn a vandal into a good contributor. Maybe they'll still turn it around. Thanks for your quick response! -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c -- 00:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I blocked the sock indef. If you feel that I am too slow, you could go to AIV if the situation recurs, but I'm happy to help. -- Where 03:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For archiving..my old pretty mutli-color sig

-- '''[[User:Weirdoactor|weirdoactor]] [[User talk:Weirdoactor|t]]|[[Special:Contributions/Weirdoactor|c]]''' --

I'll miss you, old chum. -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c 02:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smiley ^_^

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

-WarthogDemon 02:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, WarthogDemon! I needed that. -- weirdoactor ^t^|^c 03:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. :) -WarthogDemon 01:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of User Input

This guy thinks it's cool to delete another user's input on a deletion discussion!!! It's not. Learn how to play nice, weirdo (good name, btw). Maybe you should go play in the Sandbox until you do. NewStew 17:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]