User talk:The Evil Spartan

Archives - August 27, 2007 August 28, 2007 - December 10, 2007

Durvillaea

Hi The Evil Spartan, thanks for creating Durvillaea, however, the redirect should really go the other way. Durvillaea is the proper spelling, not Durvillea (the previous spelling). Cheers. -203.171.67.232 (talk) 01:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it's already been handled. Thanks for the contribution. The Evil Spartan (talk) 10:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Template move

Hey TES, a quick question; why'd you move Template:User Support Independence for Tibet? The new location User:UkraineToday/Support Independence for Tibet doesn't seem right. Perhaps it should be moved back? --dotDarkCloud (talk) 14:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Nope. Please see WP:UM. There's a big ugly history behind this, but userboxes that are at all political should be moved to the userspace. Otherwise, they will probably get deleted. The Evil Spartan (talk) 22:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Arbcom elections

I'm not sure if you saw it, but I did respond to your question on the questions page for my candidacy. Rebecca (talk) 23:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I did, and thank you for the response. However, I don't agree with your answer, and as such I will keep my vote as such. Thank you for your time anyway. The Evil Spartan (talk) 23:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Phil Joel image

I'm a little confused. The only image of Phil Joel that I have uploaded is a photograph that I took, so I don't think it should have been listed as a fair-use item. At any rate, somebody came behind me long ago and replaced my image on the Phil Joel page with one that looked like a publicity shot. Mooveeguy (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 20:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, well then. We shall simply revert it. I did not look at the page history. Thanks. The Evil Spartan (talk) 23:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

ANI - TheDoctorIsIn

What do I need to be warned about? While I admit I certainly wouldn't treat TheDoctorIsIn as I originally did with him back in March, I think I've been very fair and civil with him since. I'm actively looking for help on how to deal with such editors, and hope to write an essay once I feel a bit more successful with situations such as User_talk:Ronz#Another_solution:_Balkans_arbitration_remedy. --Ronz (talk) 01:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Edit warring. You jumped into it immediately after the page was unprotected. And you weren't just being bold, becuase you continued to revert after he reverted you. The Evil Spartan (talk) 01:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I removed content per WP:V with a detailed edit summary and long discussions on the talk page. I didn't continue to revert anyone, other than adding back a tag I added identifying another long-running dispute. --Ronz (talk) 01:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I was being bold, making an edit that I clearly stated, and discussed in detail, that I thought was consensus. Further, the current state of the article indicates that it indeed is consensus. The editor that reverted it was not a part of the discussions. Someone had to make the first move. I did, just as I had in the talk page discussions when they stalled and completely stopped. --Ronz (talk) 17:32, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

AN Post

I saw your refactored AN post about the power structure. Was it at my comments there and at Mitt Romney that you meant or more in general? Sorry if it was me, it was unintended. Mbisanz (talk) 08:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

No. I even provided the link to what I was mad about. No, certainly nothing about that. Sorry. The Evil Spartan (talk) 08:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Lucy Hannah SNN

Hi, what is the SNN? I did add a link in the article to the Social Security Death record that I found at Ancestry.com, in case that is what you mean. Thanks, -- Shunpiker (talk) 16:46, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

It's SSN, misspelt. Duh, you should be reading the sentence for what I meant, not what I said. ;) The Evil Spartan (talk) 18:40, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I thought you might have meant that, but you never know. Anyway, the SSN is 363-68-1988 and I did link (under "References") to the corresponding page on Ancestry.com. Thanks, -- Shunpiker (talk) 05:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

That Rfc

Don't worry about it. There was nothing wrong with filing an Rfc on that editor, but raul was correct that traditionally, Rfc's are reserved for established editors. If he persists in being little more than disruptive, edit wars and fails to understand our policies, then he'll probably end up banned anyway. Happy holidays!--MONGO (talk) 08:44, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Too late. The Evil Spartan (talk) 08:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

D'oh...now you might have a clue why I chose the username MONGO!--MONGO (talk) 08:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Ze username block

Yeah, my mistake (User talk:F uckBot Mk. 1); blocks per username are normally set to allow account creation, and I forgot to check that this was indeed the case. Fixed. — Coren ^(talk) 13:26, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Blessed editing, and...

Happy Holidays from Marlith ^T/C Please feel free to contribute to Wikipedia:Song/The Twelve Days of Christmas

Credits: This card was inspired by Macy's123, assistant of V's Shop

Marlith ^T/C

Happy editing

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For tirelessly fighting vandals and reporting them at WP:AIV. Happy editing, Snowolf How can I help? 08:10, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow, a barnstar and Merry Christmas all within one day. 'Tis the most wonderful time, of the year.... The Evil Spartan (talk) 08:12, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

and me too!

		The Minor Barnstar
		For your "conscience attack" -- for allowing civility to win out over your lesser nature -- I award you this little barnstar. Water it with kindness and it will grow! – Quadell (talk) (random) 14:29, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Trend setter plus is at it still...

... on Randy Dodge. I hate moronic vandals. Ψν^Psi_nu 13:06, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Nah, don't hate. Not worth it. Anyway, I've got him up on Lupin's recent changes filter, so don't worry. Or try WP:AIV. The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Wire pictures

Purely aesthetic reasons, my good man. They will of course be replaces when there's images from the episodes available. –FunkyVoltron ^talk 14:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

re Arceus fan

I have unblocked per the discussion here and have commented on the editors talkpage. Yuletide Felicitations. LessHeard vanU (talk) 00:50, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

I Could Use Some Help

I tagged this template with a PROD tag for deletion. Obviously I am doing something wrong. Could you help me out? Take Care and Merry Christmas...NeutralHomer ^T:C 17:07, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Sent to TFD. Prods are only allowed for articles and user pages. The Evil Spartan (talk) 17:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, OK :) If I have to tag a template again, what do I use? - NeutralHomer ^T:C 17:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

See WP:TFD. The Evil Spartan (talk) 17:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

/bookmarked/ Thanks for your help! Merry Christmas...NeutralHomer ^T:C 17:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Stringing machine

Well, it's a bit arguable, and since the article has no verifiable independent sources, it could have been deleted as not asserting notability anyway. The reinstated version also appears to have been spam until the commercial link was removed. The article, although still unsourced, at least is a few sentences long now, so I'll let it be, Jimfbleak (talk) 06:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Confused

The Evil Spartan, can you explain how changing an unsourced comment to something that seems more accurate, albeit still unsourced is considered vandalism?Reinoe (talk) 16:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, your referring to this. Because the second figure was patently wrong, quite simply (it looks like a lot more than 25 people attended this. We can't just change figures because they're unsourced; instead of changing them off-hand, it's better to source them. If I read something unsourced saying there were 3 million people in the USA at the time of the American Revolution, and change it to 30,000 just because it's unsourced, it's vandalism. Just another question - as stated, I do not assume bad faith - but can you explain why there are so many vandalism warnings on that page? The Evil Spartan (talk) 20:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

No I'm not referring to that that. (I'm not that great at creating links yet). I'm referring to [this]. And the reason why I did so is because it's not the first time that a person with an agenda may have doctored photos. I'm sure we all know about the Saddam Statue Toppling Media Event. Since I could not find a source for the ridiculous claim of 25000, and given Beck's nature, I changed the rally numbers to something that looked more realistic. Glenn Beck's own site doesn't seem to have a number for the Marshall university event. And I'm going to go ahead and assume in good faith that your link implying that my IP address had been banned repeatedly was an accident and not an effort to try and show me in a negative light.Reinoe (talk) 22:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I saw a note at WP:ANI about someone who was complaining that your IP has been doctoring numbers for a while now, and I see he may have had a good point. Please do not change numbers simply because you disagree with them, especially to a number you happen to think is in the right vicinity, and most especially because you think there might be a conspiracy. Beck's website is quite clear that most rallies were in the range of 30000. Do not change numbers arbitrarily, it falls under the guise of WP:OR. The Evil Spartan (talk) 22:21, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Really? I gave the WP:ANI a scan and I saw the following IP's listed that seemed to be under watch:

• 66.176.219.18=Not my IP address
• 82.148.96.68=Not my IP address
• 24.7.81.82=Not my IP address
• 68.123.72.85=Not my IP address

Also Beck's site is quite clear that none of his rallies surpassed 25k with numbers given as... 20k in Clearwater,20K in Fort Wayne, 25k in Atlanta, 10k in Philadelphia, 10k in Cleveland,10k in Houston, 7k in Memphis, 4.5k in Charleston, 3k in Sacramento, 3k in Nashville, 4.5k in Tulsa, 10k in Richmond, 8k in San Antonio, 5k in Omaha, 6k in Oklahoma City, and finally "Thousands around Kentucky". Your "Beck's website is quite clear that most rallies were in the range of 30000" isn't even within the realm of reality. Please remove my warning that was given unfairly.Reinoe (talk) 22:44, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

You're not 82.148.96.68? I thought that was the warning we were talking about? In any case, it's not a warning, it was discussion. Also, even if the figure is incorrect, simply changing it to another figure out of the blue which is just as ridiculously low is not a proper solution, and introduces more errors. If there is a problem that big, then remove it, but don't change it, please. Finally, better than removing content from your talk page, it would be better to respond on it, perhaps pointing to this thread for the future reference of people. Otherwise, your page will once again just be a laundry list of vandalism warnings, and people will think you're a vandal again, and this whole process will repeat. The Evil Spartan (talk) 22:50, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

howard devoto jpeg

E.S. said: "Thanks for uploading Image:Howard devoto.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright... etc."

E.S., yours is the second message I received about properly tagging the copyright of this image. I thought I had responded properly to an earlier message from ImageTaggingBot: so far as I can determine, I then (correctly?) added the creative commons copyright tag to the description.

N.B.: I took this photo and created this image, this file. *I own the copyright.* Therefore, per your message, I don't need to do anything else?

I simply wanted to contribute something to wikipedia, where I noticed that something was missing (there was no image in this wiki), and I could help.

However, it seems that contributing to wikipedia involves too many arcane hurdles. I find this frustrating.

Best regards.

Rob Robinson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsub8 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rob. The problem with the image was simple: you didn't say that you were the creator. If you were not the creator, we would need to know where you got the image in order to verify the license (people incorrectly tag images with a breathtaking frequency). I have changed the image; please feel free to use the current layout as a template for future images. The Evil Spartan (talk) 12:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance. - Rob —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsub8 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

your msg

the tiger attack wasnt thursday, it was tuesday. that is why i removed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlippman (talk • contribs) 13:42, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I guess you're right. Please put that kind of thing in the edit summary from here on. The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Bert McCracken

Kindly explain to me how any of what I did classifies as vandalism. It says if I try to "vandalize" again it'll block me from Wikipedia. I've cited everything I can, and half of it isn't even me, it's a previous rendition of the page, thank you very much. What is going on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.26.85.49 (talk) 21:31, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

My apologies. This happens to look like a bad coincidence. Often times when you were editing, the part that the anti-vandal patrol was bringing up was where it said "and he likes to eat his boogers" - it appears to have (incorrectly) marked that as an addition by you. However, it looks like that was older vandalism, and not your fault. I didn't want to remove the warnings from your page, as to cause more problems. I will do so now. The Evil Spartan (talk) 21:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.26.85.49 (talk) 21:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Incidently, the phrase was still there til I took it out just now. The Evil Spartan (talk) 22:22, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for helping me out with the image. I can't figure out the whole uploading thing because the upload file page is confusing. I just want to use a picture I own on my laptop. Why is it so hard to put them on here? I mean I own the picture. No copywrite infringement there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bfalexander (talk • contribs)

On the upload page, click the link that says "It is entirely my own work". Under licensing, choose a license: they're all pretty similar. I suggest just going with "own work, copyleft". No need to worry about the summary section. Click browse for source filename, give it an appropriate local name (i.e., if the source name is 472389233923_1982347PN0_L.jpg, try calling it something like Bfalexander_photo.jpg instead). And voila, you should be in the clear. Not half as hard as it sounds, either. :) The Evil Spartan (talk) 22:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with this. I just needed to know about the license thing. I understand everything else. -Brian Alexander (talk) 22:05, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright. I'll not worry about archiving yet. I'm just tyring to keep my stuff organized that is all -Brian Alexander (talk) 22:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Artist Pictures Reply

I'll take a look at that after I complete what I'm working on now. -Brian Alexander (talk)

AFC

I saw you reverted my "faulty assumption" on the sources, but the same IP user is creating many pages, and not specifying a specific source, just a bit confused. Thanks, Nol888_(Talk)^(Review) 17:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

In fact, you declined only part of a single submission (submitter improperly used headers). There were references, albeit it cheesy ones, at the bottom. I figured if you're going to decline a submission, you should decline the entirety of a single submission. The Evil Spartan (talk) 14:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Huh?

What's with this edit? Vandalism? What sort of nonsense are you up to? 35.9.6.175 (talk) 15:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Good point. I was unaware that IPs could become admins, however, seeing as you claimed to be blocking someone, and just a few hours ago were vandalizing an admin's talk page. From now on, I will have to respect comments from block evading trolls. The Evil Spartan (talk) 15:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Weird. Not on a connect that's terribly secure, didn't want to log in. But the only edits I have made were to AN/I and this page - no idea how there are other edits attributed to this IP. Anyway, your edits are totally uncalled for. Good faith edits aren't vandalism. And insults are never acceptable - but maybe you should re-read our policies on personal attacks and civility and the definition of vandalism. 35.9.6.175 (talk) 15:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)