User talk:Nick/Archive6

	Archives
	Archive 1; Archive 2; Archive 3 ; Archive 4

VP2 Edit Summaries and Vandalism Warnings

If you're here to post a message about a warning that has been left on your userpage or an edit summary attributes the wrong user, there's no need, it's a bug in the software that is under investigation over at WP:VP2.
Just remove the warning from your userpage (but leave an Edit Summary explaining why) and all will once again be well with the world. This happens when I go back to a previous page I've already looked at, whereby it keeps the new page editor details and uses the new editor details to leave a warning and compose the Edit Summary. As I now know how the problem occurred, unintentional vandalism warnings have stopped, but the Edit Summary issue is still being worked upon. Best Wishes Heligoland

My RFA : I'd like to thank all those who Supported me on my recent Request for Adminship, if your wondering where it went, I withdrew at 32/18/6. It looked pretty unlikely to reach a meaningful consensus. I'll consider resubmitting after New Year to Mid-January in keeping with the following successful RfAs where the candidates have broadly similar time on project or similar previous RfAs : Tawker Acetic Acid Daniel Olsen Fvw2 Hedley Inter Naconkantari Rob Church Zzyzx11

Reversion on talk:Stanley Park

I just noticed that you reverted a good faith talk edit I made on December 1, but you attributed the edit to someone else. In fact, it looks like the person you attributed my edit to didn't even edit the talk page. Anchoress 02:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a bug in VP2 as per the box at the top of this page. Sorry about that. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 13:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's not an acceptable response, IMO. That edit went uncorrected for nine days. If you knew there was a bug, why the heck didn't you check the edits of the bot to determine if it was breaking WP rather than fixing it? And where is the 'investigation' mentioned in the 'box' at top? I would like to see evidence that more is being done than just apologising for erroneous warning templates; I want to see that there is action being taken to make sure that this bot hasn't got other uncorrected erroneous edits out there. Where is that investigation happening? Anchoress 17:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you visit WP:VP2 you'll find details of the software and the small number of bug reports we've made. This is the first report of an error I've had on my talk page for a month too. I keep a close eye on all the edits I make manually and with software and I'm quite happy that this is a one off. It could be down to a number of issues, probably the bug as above, an edit conflict or a db error. I'd be happy to even credit it to a human error, but the differing edit summaries do somewhat exclude that possibility. Whatever the reason, it's something that doesn't happen now on anything other than an erratic and exceptionally rare basis. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 19:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but if you keep such a close eye on your edits then why didn't you catch mine? And since you didn't catch it, how confident can you be that there aren't more? Anchoress 19:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy enough to continue using the software, and a whole month with just your comment coming back suggests the software is stable and reliable. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 20:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Block User:216.138.113.179

This IP belongs to a high school. Many constructive edits come from the school. Consider a soft block. Eclectek ^C ^T 19:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, you're not an admin and therefore can't block. Eclectek ^C ^T 19:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 19:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits on Wikipedia: Icons

Why did you revert the edits below?

[1] --Mac Lover ^Talk _C 00:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure as it was several weeks back. Having a quick look, it'll most likely be spam, the website being in a foreign language or the website hosting confirmed or suspected copyright infringing material. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 00:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Revised vandalism warning system

Hi Heligoland, as a vandal-fighter I thought you might be interested in seeing this discussion. Regards, Accurizer 22:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

-

Hello Heligoland! I want to thank you for taking time to comment in my recent request for adminship. Though it didn't succeed, I value everyone's opinion, and hope to use the descriptions of the neutral and oppose votes to improve. T e ckWiz^TalkContribs_@ 22:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for voting

I appreciate the feedback that I received during the RfA process. Unfortunately, I withdrew my candidacy. However, your participation is appreciated. I have made my New Years Resolution (effective immediately) to attempt to vote on at least 50 WP:XFD/week (on at least 5 different days), to spend 5 hours/week on WP:NPP, to be active in WikiProjects and to change the emphasis of my watchlist from editorial oversight to vandalism prevention. I have replaced several links that I had on my list to some that I think are more highly vandalized (Tiger Woods, Barry Bonds, my congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr., my senator Barrack Obama and Jesse Jackson). My first day under my newly turned leaf was about what I hope a typical day to be. I quickly found a vandal, made a few editorial changes to Donald Trump, voted at WP:CFD and WP:AFD, continued attempted revitalization of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Chicago and proposed a new stub type as a result of WP:NPP patrol. I hope this will broaden my wikipedia experience in a way that makes me a better administrator candidate. I hope to feel more ready to be an admin in another 3000 or so edits. TonyTheTiger 16:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Argo Tea

What does a withdrawn nomination get the same treatment of a no consensus or a keep judgement. I.E., will there be a template with a link to the debate on the talk page? TonyTheTiger 02:15, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, good point, and done. The page technically doesn't need an AfD box but with the need to now prevent a 3rd AfD and considering the strong support to Keep the article, the page warrants the information. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 02:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tony Robinson.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tony Robinson.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 03:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image deleted along with another promo photo. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 21:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Needimage

Template:Needimage has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --32X 16:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!

Thank you for your input at my RFA, which successfully closed at 58/2/0. I will think about the 10 questions and answers I had, and I hope that I will use the tools constructively and for the benefit of Wikipedia. If you ever need any help, don't be afraid to drop me a line. I'm here to help afterall! ‎Template:Emot -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 23:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Nick/Archive6, thank you for participating in my RfA which passed on 13th December 2006 with a tally of 49/10/5. Whilst delighted by the result and a little daunted, I appreciate the various comments re lack of experience in some aspects and I shall be cautious in my use of the new tools. I am well aware that becoming an Admin is not just about a successful nomination, but a continuing process of gaining further experience and I should welcome your feedback about any Admin tasks I become involved with. Again, a whole 1/1 thanks for taking the time to consider my RfA and cast your views. Feel free to contact me if you need any assistance. :-) David Ruben 02:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Shilpa Shetty

Thank you for your edits to Shilpa Shetty, I wasn't aware that the {{needimage}} tag was being deleted, but would like to know where you found {{reqphoto}}? I didn't come across this at WP:TEMP, thanks very much anyway. Is it proper practice to put the {{reqphoto}} tag on talk pages? Wouldn't it be better on the article page as it was, in keeping with other tags for improvement, etc.? Ekantik ^talk

The {{needimage}} template looks set to be deleted. There seems to be a growing trend to move improvement messages away from article space into article-talk space with a feed into a Category. The template isn't at WP:TEMP as the template has it's own category (Category:Image_request_templates). It's correct use is on the talk page, because it lists the article in Category:Wikipedia_requested_photographs so photographers and photo hunters can supply a photo. Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 00:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your informative clarifications. I will keep those category pages on my watchlist for easy reference. Thanks again! :) Ekantik ^talk 00:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks!

Thank you so much, Heligoland, for your gracious support in my RfA (48/1/0)! I am very happy that you trust me with this great honor and privilege. If at any time you think that I need to step back and take a deep breath or just want to talk, please contact me. Happy editing! Cbrown1023 03:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warning! Process is now completely batshit insane.

I wonder, now that they've desysopped MONGO, what happens next. I'm waiting for the point where "If you offend someone you get permabanned" stage next. --Elar a girl^Talk|Count 06:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thanks for the support! MONGO 09:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

You forgot to sign...here [2]. best, Kukini 02:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AIV

I saw your report on WP:AIV. The vandal has neither been blocked before, nor has received more than a singular warning this day. The entry on the page has been removed by another admininstrator. Please report only those vandals who have gone beyond their last warnings, or have received more than two warnings (including a {{bv}}, {{test4im}}, {{test4}}) Regards, — Nearly Headless Nick 13:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nick - You might want to check why NawlinWiki didn't bother warning more than once despite 3 reverts. They beat me to a couple of reverts so I just dropped the IP addy onto WP:AIV.

Well, NawlinWiki is rather WP:ROUGE sometimes. ;) — Nearly Headless Nick 11:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pot, say hello to kettle. —Malber (talk • contribs) 20:41, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPA warning

I don't see the personal attack. I think this is a malicious application of the npa warning becuase you are involved in a talk page dispute with me. Please justify the applicataion of this warning or remove it. —Malber (talk • contribs) 21:40, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's your last comment. Now doesn't the warning state Comment on content, not on contributors so your comment Pot, say hello to kettle qualifies as a personal attack, it's nowhere near the worst I've seen but it's a conversation that was of no concern to you. I really do not appreciate you following Nearly Headless Nick around and leaving collateral damage as you pass through my talk page. I don't care that I'm in a content dispute with you, I've not gone and started following you around and I've never once been uncivil in my discussions over you, it's simply not how I do things.--Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 21:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agathoclea's RfA

Hello, and thank you for the support on my recent RfA despite your concerns. The final tally was 63/3/2, and I have now been entrusted with the mop. I hope I can live up to your trust, and certainly welcome any and all feedback. All the best, and thanks again! — Agathoclea 12:29, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Malber

Hi there!

I'm not getting worked up over Malber (it's not worth that!) but I was merely giving a dramatic example of where his argument is flawed. I really don't understand why he continues to argue about a fallen cause, but ....

Anyway, thanks for supporting me and I hope we can win.

Cheers, Yuser31415 02:54, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure our rational discussion will overcome here ;-) --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 02:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Template:Emot Yuser31415 02:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Request for Adminship

Nick/Archive6

Thanks for your support on my successful Request for Adminship (final result 78 Support /0 Oppose / 1 Neutral) I have now been entrusted with the mop, bucket and keys. I will be slowly acclimating myself to my new tools over the next months. I am humbled by your kind support and would certainly welcome any feedback on my actions. Please do not hesitate to contact me. Once again, many thanks and happy new year! All the best, Asterion^talk 15:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Heligoland RfA Voting.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Heligoland RfA Voting.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

I am apologizing for any uncivil comments I made in Matt's AFD. As it stands, I have removed the comments and hope to let you know I was allowing outside influences (like work) affect my judgement when posting. I wish you all the best this holiday season, and yes, you can count on my support for your next bid at Adminship. --Brian_{(view my history)}/^{(How am I doing?)} 22:16, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your apology and I apologise if I said anything I shouldn't have. I hope you have a happy and peaceful 2007. --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 00:59, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your reversion at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#BostonMA

Hello:

I noticed that you reverted the division of the RfA for BostonMA; while its may be true that the Tangobot and DragonFlight have problems with divided pages, Wikipedia isn't designed for the benefit of bots -- but for human editors. For some users, the issue of very long pages, such as at this RfA has become prohibits editing. The subject of division has recently been discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship#Voting_pages_over_30_kilobytes, at which Doc Glasgow stated:

Bots? Tough. Most people using AfD don't refer to bots. We don't create pages for the benefit of bells and whistles. Splitting the support/oppose/neutral sections makes perfect sense. Let's do it. The bots can catch up when they can.--Doc^g 14:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Further, the author of Tangobot pointed out:

The code suggested above is pretty much what was come up with last time this was discussed (I think it was shortened slightly, but the same basic idea). The issue with bots is a non-issue, the programmers in question can simply alter the bots to understand the new format, as they've done in the past when changes have been made to the template. Oh, and that's not the right archive, try looking under July 2006 - that's when I made my sample page during the discussion. --Tango 17:07, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

--Leflyman^Talk 02:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please Change Your Inappropriate Username

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

User:Heligoland: As pointed out to you elsewhere:

We should apply Official Policy so strictly that if one possible meaning violating WP:USERNAME can be found (or even alleged without proof), all the other legitimate meanings don't matter? Then please change your name at once, in accordance with WP:USERNAME#Inappropriate_usernames:

"Usernames that promote a company or website: Usernames of or closely resembling the names of companies, groups, or include the URL of a particular website are discouraged and may be blocked."

Your name doesn't just "closely resemble" but is identical to that of the group Heligoland, whose URL and MySpace ID also use that name. Acccording to their many Google hits, they don't need any more promotion via a Wikipedia username. As if further reason were needed, an Australian class-41/entertainment trademark would trigger:

"Trademarked names: Trademarked names, especially sports teams like the Miami Heat, the Carolina Hurricanes, or the New York Yankees should not be used in a username."

Following your remarks above, I trust you will not attempt to cloud the issue by dragging in other, more acceptable uses of the name "Heligoland", since you've just declared that such things don't matter. Please see Wikipedia:Changing username for the procedure you should follow now. Thank you. – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 02:19, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).

What is your problem with the name "Heligoland"? It is inoffensive, not politically charged, and not religiously provocative. I would suggest you either provide a specific grievance that is severe enough to warrant a change of an account this old - or retract this demand. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 02:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peter, it is not my problem with the name, it is the name's violations of WP:USERNAME, which is Wikipedia's Official Policy. I did not cite provisions dealing with "offensive, politically charged, or religiously provocative"; in fact I quoted above, in full and in italics, two other specific provisions which you can read either above or at WP:USERNAME. The age of the account is irrelevant; there is no provision that "You can get away with it if we don't catch you right away". – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 02:40, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).

Bring it to ANI to gauge consensus for asking him to change it then. In the past we have given leeway to established users. – Ch acor 02:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So wait, you have a problem because it seems to be related to a (very possbily) nn band that I have not heard of, and I doubt Heligo has either? Seems kinda WP:POINTy to me. ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 02:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, both of you, take the time to re-read WP:USERNAME, particularly WP:USERNAME#Changing_inappropriate_usernames. Your comments are (1) premature, Chacor; (2) the wrong forum, Chacor; and (3) irrelevant, Peter.

The first step is to ask the user to voluntarily comply with policy. If he does so, no-one else needs to intervene. Only if he refuses is any further process needed.
Co-operative contributors should normally just be made aware of our policy via a post on their talk page. Voluntary changes (via Wikipedia:Changing username) are preferred: users from other countries and/or age groups may make mistakes about choosing names -- immediate blocking or listing on RfC could scare off new users acting in good faith.
The next step, if one is needed, would take place either here or at WP:RFC/NAME:
Where a change must be forced, we first discuss it. This can take place on either (A) the user's talk page, (B) a subpage of the user's talk page, or (C) a sub page of Wikipedia:Requests for comment. It should be listed on Wikipedia:Requests for comment in the appropriate section. The user should also be made aware of the discussion.
Again, this doesn't need to take place at all if the user chooses to comply with policy of his own free will. To take this step now would be premature and amount to assuming bad faith.
Peter, had you bothered to click on either the link Heligoland or the Google search, your concern about notability might have been assuaged. This is the second time in two posts you have brought up questions or doubts already addressed by the top post in this thread. I don't want to have to keep repeating information already provided here. Please take the time to read through the material already there before either assuming or asserting the contrary. Thank you. – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 03:15, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).

Let me quote Heligo's old user page:

Heligoland is a little island formerly part of Britain, just off the German coast. It's most famous for being the first Shipping Forecast area to be changed, becoming present day German Bight and for coming close to being wiped off the face of the Earth by the British after WW2. Have a look at Heligoland for lots more information.

I see no reason not to WP:AGF and force him to change his username. I agree that this seems to be a disruptive attempt to get your way, SA. – Ch acor 02:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chacor, I have emphasized above that I am assuming good faith by asking the user to voluntarily comply with policy by changing his name. That does not "force him", it informs him of the problem and allows him to solve it himself, of his own free will. "Force" would have involved something like a threat to block him if he did not comply. I have made no such threat. However, your accusations of "force" and "this seems to be a disruptive attempt to get your way" do not seem to assume good faith. Please keep in mind that this is a guideline we are each supposed to try to follow in our own thoughts and words and actions, not merely go around accusing other people of violating. Please review your last paragraph above, in this light.

As to the name "Heligoland" evading policy because it has other (innocent) meanings besides the one single meaning that violates WP:USERNAME, I invite you to debate that concept openly with Heligoland himself, using some other username as a case in point, to make it not quite so personal. I would love to read the transcript, as it could be quite an interesting discussion. – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 03:44, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion Closed

With the greatest of respect to SAJordan, this request is inappropriate at this time, it is directly related to an ongoing RfC on which I have commented. I'm not involved with the actions that resulted in the RfC and don't wish this situation to get out of hand. I have no intention of changing my username, I've had the username for 3 months, and it was checked and changed here [3] by a bureaucrat. I based my name on the island of Heligoland, first named in English 199 years ago. The band seems to be only moderately notable and precedent has shown that users name after a place but sharing their name with a pop group or TV show have not been asked to change their username. --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 03:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This concerns your username and the Official Policy WP:USERNAME. Please do not cloud the issue with irrelevancies. Thank you. – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 03:44, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).

And as to your defense: were I a New Englander who'd moved to upstate New York, would I be allowed to describe myself by the quite fitting and generic username of "New York Yankee"? Quite clearly not. As quoted above, WP:USERNAME specifically addressed that example, and declared it inappropriate. That I might like the name would not give me a free pass. The existing (trademarked) group name precludes its being a Wikipedia username. – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 04:02, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).

Courtesy notification of WP:RFC/NAME - Heligoland. – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 08:34, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).

This should have been brought to RFC before making such insistent demands on the user. This is far from a clear cut case. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:U, first one asks the user on his talk page; if this doesn't resolve the matter, second one discusses it at RFC (or the user's talk page, or a sub-page, with notice at RFC). This was cited and quoted above (in the blue section). – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 23:12, 31 Dec 2006 (UTC).

If this name were inappropriate, the bureaucrat would not have allowed Heligo to change to it. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 17:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that is supposing the 'crat knew about the band. That is a large supposition. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:55, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]