User talk:Rodhullandemu/Archive/10

Racing Horses

...Are often pushed further than they are capable which results in broken legs. They are often raced before they have fully matured due to their increased max speed but weaker joints as they haven't fully developed --2pac 2007 (talk) 00:05, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe true. But irrelevant to their notability for our purposes. --Rodhullandemu 00:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

HarveyCarter & Friends

If you look at my User:IP4240207xx page, most of it is dedicated to traking HC & friends, I also try to list all IPs there and his favorite attack articles. Nuke all contributions without prejudice. - IP4240207xx (talk) 01:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Those weren't "good faith" (92.12.157.2 (talk · contribs)) just smack. Thanks for reverting. IP4240207xx (talk) 19:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Edits from NetRange: 92.8.0.0 - 92.13.255.255 need to revert and the IP blocked. IP4240207xx (talk) 17:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

AWB

I'm a little confused with the AWB. I don't really understand how you edit with it, even after reading the manual and all the associated pages. Cheers, Kodster (You talkin' to me?) (Stuff I messed up) 21:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Spam warnings

Well I guess you should take it to WP:RFC. Reading the discussion, there doesn't seem to be much consensus on Scaruffi being on that list to begin with (and he doesn't seem to have been there that long). Scaruffi is self-published and his reviews (at least on The Beatles) are basically one poorly-written essay, not really much critical insight. As for the issue of spamming, all I saw was one editor quickly adding one website to dozens of articles. I wasn't aware of any controversy over Scaruffi. I still feel Scaruffi is not appropriate as an expert, but I'll save that for the RFC. freshacconcispeaktome 22:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: AWB

Thanks :) John.n-IRL 01:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:81.145.242.67 (Again)

Hi "Rod"! I'm glad to see you're keeping up the good work. (This guy doesn't seem to notice "hints", let alone pay attention to them!)
The reason for my post is that I'm puzzled by this edit. Is User:MBisanzBot just saving typing by reusing your post, or is something else going on? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:02, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Ta. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

HEY!!!

Hey Rod, hope your having a good day, sorry to disturb you, i was reading your user page, i noticed this a few days ago, 14,000 edits[2]. . I tried to correct the placing of the full stop but your page is locked. Ill leave you to it. Bye! Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 22:39, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

We all get like that at times, ive had a few crushing moments recently at wikipedia, MJ, Thriller they all failed FA but i keep at it. Its frusrating for me when many of my articles cant pass because of my english skills... yet i keep going at it. You can do it, you are respected here and thats part of the reason you are an admin. You have thicker skin than this, i know. ;-) Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 01:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend and remember :"All men are created equal, but ambition, or lack of it, soon separates them." Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

You know what, i keep reading that talk page on the bailey case, its starting to really get me angry actually. I think we need to get a policy change / policy clarification for law articles. Can we cause a fuss and see if change is called for? Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 03:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Option A isnt an option lol, we are going to do something about this. I think reviewers are understandably to scared to pass the article incase they take any heat for it later. I was sure reluctant to go near it. Option B or C are a must, alternatively we can speak to the law wikiproject, maybe if we can get more support from there we have more power to apply pressure. The wiki rules wont change because of two editers (even if ones an admin). We need to rally the troops, no? Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 04:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

AWB Backlog

Hi Rod, was wondering if you could stroll down to the AWb approval site and approve me as I have over the 500 limit. There seems to be a bit of a backlog there atm hopefully you can sort it out. Christopher140691 (talk) 13:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thats ok if you don't want to approve me I will re-apply if the second pair of eyes agrees with you say in a month if thats ok and you agree with that? Christopher140691 (talk) 13:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Incivil editer - long history

This editer has a long standing history of incivility, this is some of his history, not sure what you think.

• 1 - Calls "liberals" stupid
• 2 - Call liberals "twinks" amongst other things. Twink is slag for gay
• 3 - Incivil edit summary
• 4 - numerous insults against me
• 5 - numerous insults against me

Thanx. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 19:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanx again. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 19:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Song to the Siren

Thanks for the assessment and i've put the chart information you left on the talk page in to it now. That site is a great resource! I've been looking for something like that for ages. Cheers! Sillyfolkboy (talk) 22:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser

Regarding is, ive noticed a lot of people asking for permission to use it. I keep reading about it and cant quite see what all the excitement it about, what are the benefits of it or is it not worth my time? Also i still wanna take up that law issue im just waiting for your direction, maybe when for feeling up to it. Ive been busy today trying to make a minor policy change of my own. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 01:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, call me when your ready, and make sure you do lol. Ill leave Autowikibrowser for now, ive still got a lot of article construction to get through. Ill speak to you soon, hope your computer gets better. ;-) --Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 01:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

There's a lady who's sure...

I added it back. As for "Radio Star", I believe that the Presidents' cover (which is a single) can have its own page with a brief mention of it on the original version's page. This prevents clogging up of a classic song's article with infoboxes (many bands could release cover versions as singles). indopug (talk) 06:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 18	2 May 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Wikimedia Board to expand, restructure	Arbitrator leaves Wikipedia
Bot approvals group, checkuser nominations briefly held on RfA	WikiWorld: "World domination"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Did You Know ...	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 19	9 May 2008	About the Signpost

Sister Projects Interview: Wikiversity	WikiWorld: "They Might Be Giants"
News and notes: Board elections, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured content from schools and universities	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 (talk) 06:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Rape of Europa

Is a documentary http://www.rapeofeuropa.com/ about the Nazi Plunder of Europe, it is premiering this week in Canada. The link should be in the External links page of the Nazi plunder article. Green Squares (talk) 14:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

My edit breakdown

Hey rod, ive noticed for about the last three weeks that this link to my edit breakdown no longer works. It just keeps coming up as a blank page, it used to work fine. Ive also done tests, by removing my name and replacing it with another user name and it works on them. It just wont let me see my own history anymore, i dont suppose you know why this might be?

• My edit HIStory

Cheers. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 20:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Mine was ALWAYS slow but now it appears to have stopped lol, it is quite important to me, ive been told by a number of people that i need to have more diverse edits (eg less michael and janet), id like to see if im making progress on that. Hopefully it will come back eventually. Cheers Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 20:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Administrators Rollback

Hey, I just noticed [1] this edit by you. Please take note that administrator's rollback is only for reverting vandalism. Your above edit is a misuse of that right. Please take care next time. Cheers! Mww113 (talk) 22:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Im sorry if I came on too strong. It's really no big deal, all of you vandalism reverts are excellent. All I'm saying is not to take admin's rollback too lightly. Cheers! Mww113 (talk) 22:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Odd

Odd way to start wikipedia dont you think? I have suspitions this is an ip adress who was in dispute with Ynot4tony a few days ago. In an edit summary the ip adress accused Ynot4tony of being a sock puppet of Keetoowah. Maybe the ip adress decided to make an account. The fact that he can use sock templates, can link to other pages and uses indents suggests hes catching on very quickly for a newbie lol. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 01:28, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Here was the ip adresses edit summary here. I left a warning on his page at the time asking for him to be civil. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 01:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Adding to that confusion the ip adress above was himself accused of sock puppetry by another ip adress. here. How confusing. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 01:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

John celona

Are you aware of the fact that John celona has been the victim of harrassment by at least one of the people he is now accusing of being a sockpuppet ? I realize that it would be very easy to just block him indefinitely but I think that it would be more appropriate to scold all 3 guilty parties and warn them all that they can all be blocked for disruption. : Albion moonlight (talk) 05:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

If you don't mind, can you please provide evidence of the harassment which you reference? --Jkp212 (talk) 06:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

How about REPEATED unfounded accusations of sockpuppetry of users who never even posted on any of the same pages. How about merciless stalking of unrelated posts. How about manufacturing non-existent quotes from the Toronto Star and complete silence when asked for a source. How about repeated attempts to have me banned including posting on Jim Wales personal page-only to be told in no uncertain terms by the reviewing administrator that your complaint had no merit and my NY Times source was not to be further censored by you. As one neutral observer has aptly stated- [[2]]

"This behavior coming from David and Jkp212 is reprehensible. Those 2 have been harassing John since he first dared disagree with them. They have been trying to get John blocked for months now. I for one find their behavior to be as appalling as Johns attitude toward Yarrow. I think that this matter needs to resolved in arbitration." John celona (talk) 11:25, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Another editor's quote is not evidence -- I asked that same editor for evidence.. None of the things you said are true, they are in fact, pretty ridiculous and amusing. -- please show evidence. --Jkp212 (talk) 15:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

• Do you think you might take your discussions to another venue please? My talk page is not a battleground. --Rodhullandemu 15:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppet

I am trying to get a checkuser on David in DC/Jpk212. If they have posted from the same IP I think this would firmly establish their behavior. The problem is that the checkuser page [[3]] is totally impossible for me to decipher. Could someone run a checkuser on these 2 accounts or give me idiot proof directions for them. I will be offline until Monday morning. Thanks for your patience. John celona (talk) 11:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Again with the flags

71.187.44.107 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is at it again with the flagicon additions. I warned him, but I suspect this user never reads the talk page. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 16:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Lifemask

Thanks for your input on the article, I'm not sure about all the edits though. The article relates to the album as it was originally released, and it's entire history if you like. The most recent edits seem to revolve around the album as if it were a CD release only. For example, The extra 4 tracks were not only available on the '1990 CD re-issue', they were included on the 1987 cassette version too. Whilst this is mentioned within the text, the track listings now omit this and give a different impression. I will make a small change and hope it makes things more 'accurate'. Stephenjh (talk) 22:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

If you're putting accurate in inverted commas, surely it's moot? --Rodhullandemu 00:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

What isn't? But it's more enyclopeadic and complete. Stephenjh (talk) 00:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Doctor Who

FFS!!! "fathers a daughter in the episode..." No, he does not. It is revealed that he, some twenty or so years earlier, has fathered a daughter. Is the English language that difficult to manage???http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/button_bold.png --Rodhullandemu 23:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

If you're going to swear, do it elsewhere, but not at me or on my page. I have no idea how the edits your referring to became attached to the copy-edits I made; perhaps I hit the undo button rather than the edit button accidentally. I didn't write anything about the Doctor fathering a daughter, just edited a run-on sentence into two and removed your erroneous use of irony when coincidence is the correct term. PERIOD.

Suggestion: before you make nasty cracks about use of English to a native speaker who is a published academic author, be sure you know who you're talking to, as well as the difference between irony and coincidence. I think it's time to step back and check your ego at the door. I've removed your garbage from my talk page, and believe an apology is in order. Any response can be made here. --Drmargi (talk) 23:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

• I can only go by the diff I see and the edit summary. I initially removed "ironic" because it was nothing of the sort. You appeared to revert to a plainly incorrect version, accidentally or otherwise. I had no way of knowing that. As one published academic author to another, I know the value of clarity in language; it's how I make a living and have done for over thirty years. But I'm not going to wave credentials about; I don't put "Dr" or "Prof" in my username to strike a pose of verisimilitude or credence. I may now be semi-retired and able to spend twelve or so hours a day here, but I retain some idea of when an edit, or a reversion, is wrong. Specifically, your edit, however it came about, reverted to a factually incorrect version of the article. And, for what it's worth, I have no ego. I can't afford one. Correctness is all I care about. Apart, that is, from not making a bad situation worse. And I can spell "you're". --Rodhullandemu 23:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Stuff and nonsense! What a complete evasion designed to avoid the central issue - yours was a totally inappropriate response to a relatively minor issue. Use of such vile language, even in the form of an anagram, and tied to another insult has no place here. You have abandoned the basic tenets of civility and good faith to which you so often claim to ascribe. Pfft! And now, another round of petty insults, making assumptions based on nothing. Sad. What's true is that you lack the integrity to admit you over-reacted, issue an apology and move on. Your failing, your loss of integrity. --Drmargi (talk) 05:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Doritites bosniackii

Many thanks. All is well now Robert Notafly (talk) 11:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I've recieved your message...I don't agree with you.

Rodhullandemu, I have recieved your message about those links from my contributions to the Michael Jackson article. There were information in the Michael Jackson article that were left out, which I felt strongly should be mentioned. Those links were simply references to back up my contributions. If youtube videos were a "breach of copyright laws", I apologise, for I didn't know that it was. I saw Youtube videos used as references in other articles on wikipedia.

Therainbow (talk)

Rod, i wish i had the guts to say "I don't agree with you". Lol. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 19:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

That wouldn't be a problem. People say that to me all the time. And then I block them. --Rodhullandemu 19:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

God my eyes are watering, that heading is so funny. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 19:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Conservapedia

Are you familiar with this topic? Ive discovered something very important. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 22:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

What does your email start off with, i havent email you in ages, start me off and the rest will just appear automatically. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 22:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I would like to add the details to the article, however i have suspicions the sources could be destroyed, is there a posibility to duplicate them so that we have them save?Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 22:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed it is a fringe site but we have an article on it that at one point was a GA article, actually the discussion is very interesting, for example the admins admit that they faked being religious conservatives to become admins, they acknowledge that their own site is absurd and they want a revolt and for it to be more normal. Its not a case of wanting to replace one nut job with another. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 23:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Japanese source

In this discussion an editer (who i believe to be Japanese) added a claim that a japanese artist has sold 100 million records. Another editer commented that the source was in japanese, unreadable and therefore unreliable. Shortly afterwards he removed the claim per my advise (it really wasnt readable). The japanese editer readded the claim leaving a translation of the source on the talk page. However the translation leaves further questions about the strength of the source. Could you leave your two cents. Not sure what to do. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 15:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, im going to remove it and make a link to my talk page showing your view. If thats ok, unless you want to write something yourself? Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 15:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi Rodhullandemu; I wanted to say thank you for supporting my request for adminship, which passed with 100 supports, 0 opposes and 1 neutral. I wanted to get round everybody individually, even though it's considered by some to be spam (which... I suppose it is! but anyway. :)). It means a lot to me that the community has placed its trust in my ability to use the extra buttons, and I only hope I can live up to its expectations. If you need anything, or notice something that bothers you, don't hesitate to let me know. Thanks again, PeterSymonds | talk 21:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

ID of Socks...

any way I should have picked up on this? I really thought it was just a productive IP, the edits to Gary Glitter looked good. What did I miss? I don't recall any interaction with the main account _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 22:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I don't work too much on TV shows and actors, I think Glitter ended up on my watchlist from another IP's vandalism - checking contribs after vandalism to an article on my watchlist - so I might not be much help in spotting future socks. I'll try to keep an eye out, however. Thanks! _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 00:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

AWB

I was granted it, i dont understand stage 3 tho [4]. Ive definately downloaded it as it wouldnt let me do it again lol. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 01:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah will do, i was expecting it to be easy to access, like rollback, this is darn tricky. Cheers. --Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 01:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

giving up

after long and winded discussions about Celona and his accusations of sockpuppet, some of the editors gave him a window out, and encouraged him to show good faith, and move forward. The very next edit he makes is a repeat of the sock accusation (he/they) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=212231865&oldid=212231171... for one year, editors have asked him to stop with the personal attacks: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:John_celona&diff=132031203&oldid=132031064 .. The attacks have not relented, and they make up almost his entire edit history. Nobody has done anything about it. I have lost faith that WP actually takes measures to stop these types of editors. --Jkp212 (talk) 02:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

List of best-selling albums worldwide

Me and kodster have been working on this article and once its fully sourced we are going to take it to FL. I was just woundering, would we be allowed a fair rational for having an album cover or two shown in there. Your thoughts are welcome as always, cheers. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 23:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, it might be nice to add one for for each of the respective boxes, although that would be 4, which might be too many. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 23:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, me and kodster have talked about it, we would like to stick up the Thriller, seg pepper and one other cover. We are going to take it to FL soon, do i need to give new rationals for using these pictures or can i just steal them from the albums article page. Might need your assistance on this one, im not up to scratch with fair use policy. Cheers. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 19:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, ill try, theres only one way to learn, i think you need to get into editing articles, i can imagine vandal reversion must get so bleak after a while. If you fancy a laugh, go visit som RfA's, its wikidrama central, the best place for entertainment. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 20:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah fair enough. Well i find them entertaining anyway. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 20:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations!

On 15 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Flat Baroque and Berserk, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 08:51, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 20	12 May 2008	About the Signpost

Explicit sexual content draws fire	Sighted revisions introduced on the German Wikipedia
Foundation receives copyright claim from church	Board to update privacy policy, adopts data retention policy
Update on Citizendium	Board candidacies open through May 22
Two wiki events held in San Francisco Bay Area	New feature enables users to bypass IP blocks
WikiWorld: "Tony Clifton"	News and notes: Autoconfirmed level, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Changes at Featured lists
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 (talk) 09:35, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:193.61.85.126

Thanks for leaving a block note on User talk:193.61.85.126. Just as I clicked the block button, my boss's boss's boss walked up and asked me for something. Since I applied an anonymous IP block, I went ahead and replaced [5] your block message with the {{anonblock}}. Thanks again for making sure I did not forget to leave a notice! --Kralizec! (talk) 12:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

AWB

How long do I have to wait to get approved?! I have over 500 edits nowXp54321 (talk) 22:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your timely response!Xp54321 (talk) 21:33, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Question(s)

Just downloaded everything necessary for awb. But I don't see where to start the program. (No desktop icon,start menu has nothing) Does it start automatically? I would hate to download something and found I couldn't use it a second time.It's currently on because I activated its exe file right from where I extracted it to.Help!I am approved.Xp54321 (talk) 22:08, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Use of rollback

Please remember that rollback should only be used to revert blatant vandalism. Reverts like this should be made the traditional way. Using rollback sends the message "that edit was so worthless that it doesn't even justify an edit summary in reverting it". Thanks! Stifle (talk) 10:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

If you think persistent addition of an incorrect infobox to Paul O'Grady (sometimes twice a day, every day) by a continuous stream of sockpuppets of User:WJH1992 who was blocked over six months ago, yet persists, it not a proper subject for rollback, perhaps you will care to spend the hour or so I spend DAILY dealing with this pest. Just take a look at the history of Paul O'Grady. Are you sure you're an admin? And your talk page "wizard" wastes my time. There are more vandals out there. --Rodhullandemu 10:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll watch the page once it's unprotected.

Yes, I'm sure I'm an admin, and for quite some time longer than your good self. Please remember to be civil.

I'm sorry that you found the talk page wizard unuseful. I receive a great many messages, mostly from new users, of the "why did you delete my page" variety as well as messages that should go to an admin noticeboard. The system is a way of managing messages so that they go to the right place, or helping users to find their own answers. The link to reply to a message is just two clicks in and I think it is as accessible as possible while serving its purpose.

Don't feel that you have to reply to this if you are too busy vandal-fighting. Stifle (talk) 10:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Archives

I was reading the Michael Jackson archives last night (lol half of it is about King of Pop or Wacko Jacko in the lead), but the other half contains loads of BLP breaches. Seriously its only been in recent times that they,ve been looked after that talkpage. I think they need to have some of the crap removed. Are we allowed? Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 16:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure ill get around to it when im bored ;-), thanx. Im putting the madonna article under reassessment, feel free to give your opinion. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 17:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Have a nice day. . Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 02:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The Beatles

Yes, it was. I was debating with myself on which bands I should take out. If you look at the PR, Rurhfisch says that, per WP:WEIGHT, some of the band names should be taken out. I don't know how to do this. Any advice? Cheers, Kodster (You talkin' to me?) (Stuff I messed up) 20:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Incivility & "Homosexual agenda"

This editer is utterly offensive. If he disagrees with someone he calls them heterophobes. He has an extreme right wing agenda, calling LGBT equality a "Homosexual Agenda" and goes on about "Liberal bias".

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

There is a large amount of discrimination, incivility and fringe theory from this editer. Please can you look into this. If you are too busy please point me in the direction of the best place to take it. Thanx. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 09:13, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Homosexual agenda is right wing hate speech. See this view point on its definition. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 09:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure please keep an eye out, i was thinking of taking it to fringe theory as "Homosexual Agenda" is an absurd theory in itself. But will let it go for now. Realist² ('Come Speak To Me') 10:05, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk

How on earth does anyone find a previous post to your talk page? Stifle by name, ..... ? --Rodhullandemu 22:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I archive my talk page regularly. The archives are linked at the top, by date range. Stifle (talk) 22:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Re this post and that immediately above; pure accident. It shouldn't be like that and heaven help an unsophisticated, or unintelligent editor (i.e. the norm, uhh?) --Rodhullandemu 22:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Um, what? You're saying that I should never archive my talk page?

• I receive dozens of messages each month, if I kept them all here then the page would become totally unmanageable.
• The messages can be accessed in the page history as well as the archives.
• I also copy (almost) all my replies to the other user's talk page so they can be found there.

Or am I completely missing your point? And what does "Stifle by name..." mean anyway? Stifle (talk) 23:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, do you mean the talk page wizard? That's there to ensure that people's queries get answered as quickly as possible, by helping people answer their own question (like "why was the page deleted"), or redirecting queries that any admin could answer to the admin noticeboards. Anyone can just click the "Add section" link at the top anyway. Stifle (talk) 23:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm saying that Admins should always be receptive to communication; this is part of the transparency and openness of Wikipedia; the only reason I reply here is that this is where the reply link takes me; that's not my choice; it's yours. A less-sophisticated editor, such as a newbie, is likely to be deterred by this structure. Maybe I am able, due to my permissions, and other abilities, to negotiate your hierarchy. But if you are going to set up structures to enable communication, I would suggest that you do so with regard to the lowest common denominator here. Otherwise, you might as well not invite communication at all, and that is not what being an Admin is about. --Rodhullandemu 23:21, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, very few people have the same opinion as you on the wizard, and in fact if you look right below the copy of this answer on my talk page, you'll find that someone's even awarded me a barnstar for it. I have made every effort to make it as simple as possible while making sure that people's enquiries get directed to the place where they will be answered quickest, but if you have any suggestions as to how I could improve them I would be most delighted to hear them. Stifle (talk) 23:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The point is that if an editor (who may well be unsophisticated and unversed in the ways of Wikipedia) wants to reply to you- directly- your wizard could be seen as unhelpful. I'd click on the "Talk" field, and it would bring me here; but as an "unsophisticated" user, where would I go? What if none of your options were appropriate? As an editor, and an Admin, I'm here something like twelve hours a day, but I don't have a problem distinguishing between "immediate action" and the rest. I can't understand why you demarcate in that way; you're not that busy. --Rodhullandemu 23:44, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I take your point, but don't agree with it. The last link is "some other reason" which would cover if none of the options were appropriate. Stifle (talk) 23:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Gay icon

there is a edit war going on by an ip user at the Gay icon page. I left a post on the article talk page as to why the Cyndi Lauper image should be favorable over one of Madonna. Would you mind taking a look? The Bookkeeper (_{of the Occult}) 09:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

appears to have been resolved as the page is now semi protected. The Bookkeeper (_{of the Occult}) 10:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Must be doing the job properly...

can you stop flipping undoing the reading schoolpage, wat the hell is wrong with a picture of the school you moron! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.248.210.36 (talk) 11:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Michael Jackson photos

That michael jackson guy added more pictures, im reverting him every time. ;-) --Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 18:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, down with the infidels!!!! Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 18:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the main MJ picture, does it need to be smaller, that big a picture is bound to be against some stupid policy. Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 18:36, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Also me and Kodster are having problems with our FL review, take a lookie, dont comment if you dont want to but id like to know your thoughts on my talk page at least. Some reviewers seem to think that because there is no definitive list of the worlds best selling albums, our article cant be reliable. While some comments have been helpful, ill admit that there are improvements we can and should make, there seems to be another argument that no list we construct could ever be reliable enough my FL standards. It seems that even if we tick every box, fundamentally this article could never be promoted because there is no offical, reliable list out there. One reviewer described it as an amatuer attempt to build a list of best selling albums. There have been a number of other suggestions, not all of them helpful. Well im really lost on this one, im getting the impression that this article cound never be FL no matter how good it is. Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 19:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm its seems its a no go, as far as i know there is no list of the worlds best selling albums that would be reliable by FL standards. Any list we construct will be seen as original research. This is why i called for a GL standard, at the moment its FL or nothing, it really sucks. Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 20:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

WTF, have you seen this pro MJ pov pusher, its absurd. Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 15:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Deaths in 08

I know... I'm working on it.--Dr who1975 (talk) 02:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Found one... had to go to the darn Atlanta Journal Constitution.--Dr who1975 (talk) 02:11, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Kris Marshall

Please explain this detrimental revert - [6] thanks -- John (Daytona2 · Talk · Contribs) 13:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, thanks -- John (Daytona2 · Talk · Contribs) 13:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Leslie Ash

Hi. Can you tell me in what way such bacteriological detail is appropriate in an article about an actress? Thanks. --Rodhullandemu 12:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

She didn't have MRSA, and your edits twice (so far) made the article say that she did. Please explain to me how writing falsehoods that disagree with the associated link is desirable.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 17:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

If you continue to edit the wikipedia to deliberately include falsehoods I will start treating it as content vandalism. This will eventually result in you being suspended from editing priviledges.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 18:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Not only is this a BLP issue, but it's possible to consider your edit as libel- MRSA can be an incurable, contagious disease, but MSSA can be cured. If the wikipedia goes around saying that she had MRSA when she didn't, the wikipedia could actually be liable, and she's already had one big payout. This really is a big deal.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 19:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Nothing to do with WP:BLP in the slightest. For one thing, "the Wikipedia" would not be liable; the Wikimedia Foundation, its parent body, might, if such a statement were held to be libellous. However, the MRSA/MSSA is so well-sourced that the Foundation is exempt under Sec. 230 of the DCA for "innocent dissemination", and that's without the usual defences of justification and fair comment. Please try not to argue law with a lawyer, because you will lose every time, and usually expensively. --Rodhullandemu 19:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks so much for your support in myRfA, which closed successfully this morning. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 19:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

WJH1992 socks

If you ever get comments on reverting / blocking WJH socks, this IP address may be a good reference: User talk:88.111.148.117. Without you or me interfering (as the usual suspects in his previous blocks), he managed to get blocked in one hour time, not for sockpuppetry but purely for his editing... Fram (talk) 06:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Rodhullandemu. Something to consider - Doczilla suggested on my talk page that we maintained a list (if possible) of articles that are frequently vandalised by WJH1992 on the category talk page for their sock list. Might be worth doing because it makes them easier to block if you or Fram aren't around :). ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 15:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rodhullandemu. I've finally got around to creating the page for WJH1992 - I've put some explanation on my talk page. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 12:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Japanese sources

You are a terrible admin. In regards to this message you left [7] where you state that this source [8] does not mention anything about selling more than 100 million records. You claim to be able to read what is written, so do explain to me what this says 歌謡界史上初のレコード売り上げ「１億枚」を突破。Not only is the wikipedia given a poor reputation by many vandal editors, but admins like yourself destroy articles as well. 220.253.192.72 (talk) 11:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you are mistaken, and have not read my opinion with sufficient care. Thanks. --Rodhullandemu 11:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I don' think I have been mistaken, your words cited as "Having looked at this one, there is a mention of "100 million" but its not clear of what." However it clearly states "100 million records in the music industry" so please do point out where I am mistaken. There is no problem with the reference being Japanese either, as they are accepted. 220.253.192.72 (talk) 13:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I cannot tell whether the original source is reliable; and whereas I saw "100 million.." in the translation, I did not see "..records in the music industry". I have given a detailed reply on the article's talk page as to policy, but it is the responsibility of any editor wanting to add content to satisfy the relevant policies. Sorry if this is unhelpful, but as an admin I am bound by policy with respect to content. Thanks, but I will take another look at it. --Rodhullandemu 13:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Jikes, looks like we pissed him off, looks like hes reporting us lol. --Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 14:38, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

:::::You removed a referenced statement, which is easily verified with any web translator, ignoring the responses of another editor as "meaning nothing" and provided no validation for your actions. Though to e be fair, it was the response from this admin that really vandalized the article, and his/her conduct is appalling and unfit for administration. 220.253.192.72 (talk) 14:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Any simple web translator for non-Japanese speaking people will translate レコード売り上げ as record sales, and that is right next to 100 million. I find that very interesting with your reply! The original source is by the Nippon News Network! Thats like saying CNN is not respectable as a reference! I did my best to avoid any personal attack towards you, which was not easy. 220.253.192.72 (talk) 14:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Rod, semi protect your page, he can take his complaints elsewhere. Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 14:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

That won't be necessary. Should this editor complain, I would prefer all his comments, and my replies, to be fully visible in all their glory. After all, The First Law of Holes applies here, I think. --Rodhullandemu 14:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

If your bored this might interest you. Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 19:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Its ok, Rod would you please look at the album list FL review again. At long last i have found a reliable source that documents the worlds best selling albums, it was compiled in 2007 so its up to date, now im being told that if i used it then that might be a copy vio. So lets get this straight, if i go out looking for individul figures that makes it a list compiled by original research, if i use one excellent up tp date source its a copy vio!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is pathetic. Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 20:05, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Scientology

The material included that was reversed on Dr. Sargant is very pertinent to the subject for it deals with brainwashing. In the discussion page of the article on Scientology, there is a new entry on the subject of brainwashing that is intended to clarify these possible inclusions to the article. It is very pertinent material rather than just contentious or vandalism. JDPhD (talk) 00:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Incident report

Care to explain your respone more in detail, because I do not understand what you are writing. You claim that I am "forum-shopping" and that everyone is acting in good-faith (which is nonsense) The two editors I reported on the incident page refuse to accept what was written on the reliable sources board, and continue to disregard the references. How is that good-faith on their part? You in turn say you agree with what is written on the reliable sources page as correct (a different attitude compared to what you wrote before) and tell me to move on, and avoid personal attacks. However the issue has not been resolved. 220.253.155.88 (talk) 17:53, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Everyone was, as far as I can see, acting in good faith when that assessment was made by the editor on the RS noticeboard. If, having referred the other editors to the advice on that board, they refuse to accept it, they should be questioning it there by arguing against it. I am now quite happy that the RS board advice is correct, because there was more information available there than there was originally on the article's talk page. So once you had an answer there, there was no need to mention me on WP:ANI (which is not the complaints board in any case), because following that, I had not persisted in resisting your efforts to include the information. If the other editors are still not accepting the advice on the RS noticeboard, well, they should be. That's what it's for. I've spent quite some time looking at the relevant policy, as I say, and coupled with the RS noticeboard advice, there is no reason why that material should not go into the article. --Rodhullandemu 18:02, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I listed your name on the incident board, only to give a background history on the issue, and that Realist2 further listed you as agreeing it should not be allowed after they refused the advice from the reliable source board. I believed the reliable source board did not help the situation, and the incident board looked like the best place to gain admin support. Already, another Japanese musician had their reference removed from this article. If I was to leave the problem alone, then the artist articles would have their references removed due to the same problem, along with the information it provided. Which would destroy many articles.220.253.155.88 (talk) 18:19, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The two users continue to refuse adding this information back into the article. This is why my intial comments to them were harsh and not in good faith. I have had many dealings with these types of users during the last few years on the wikipedia. It was evident in the way they replied to Katsuya that they do not want the information there. I mention this to you because you know the situation, and was hoping you could take the time to intercept.

There is also another issue, regarding Harout72. This user has deleted the reference for artist "Hibari Misora" and replaced it with an old reference published in 1989 that I had mentioned. This is not of equal quality compared to the more recent Japanese reference, a reference that is simple to confirm. This has removed the artist from the 75 million bracket. This is a problem because it is easy to find old English sources which have out-of-date information for the other foreign musicians, which can mean removing them completely from the article. That can affect the information in other articles too. I remember an old edit by Harout72, located here [9] where the foreign artists "Alla Pugacheva" and "Wei Wei" had their references replaced, which removed them from the 200 million bracket. However, the references were reliable and written in English. From the same link, you can notice Harout72 is also added artists to the list that do not have reliable references such as "Simply Red" and "Sound Garden" So this looks like deliberate conduct that isn't with the intention to improve the article. 220.253.155.88 (talk) 01:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Ive invited the ip adress to discuss this at my talk page, i dont think we can have constructive discussions on that artist talk page. Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 01:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

ani

Gold.

Good for you ;) - Revolving Bugbear 20:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Academy Award for Best Picture

Okay. Here's the list of Best Picture winners. Here's the link by the Oscars website [10] that says exactly what this list does. I have two questions:

1. Is that copyright violation? (I just want to make sure.)
2. How would this be referenced? With footnotes, or could it just be put in a "References" section by itself w/o footnotes?

Thanks for your time. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 20:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, so just add it under "External Links"? Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 20:53, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if you looked at the article. There is no references section. No worries, I'll make one. :) Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 20:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

SHARP SHOOTER

Wow, i reverted him in less than a minute, not bad, you got to the vandal template first though, darn it. ;-) --Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 23:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Haha, cheers. I feel old already. ;-) --Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 23:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Criminal Damage in English law

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I have reviewed the article "Criminal Damage in English law" you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. You have seven days from the time I posted my comments to improve the article. If you need more time, want to let me know you have finished updating the article, or have any any questions or comments, leave a note on the article's talk page. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 15:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

The New Age of Atlantic

I was getting to side one (it's lunch here now), but I don't know what a project MOS is. Fantailfan (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but I've never seen a track listing standard for single- or multi-artist compilation albums or soundtracks. I've done them in some ways I like - here and here. What I've done here and here is awkward, at best.

Oh, and I finished The New Age of Atlantic track listing which I kept looking for in 1975 after Yesterdays came out. It was twenty years before I found out that it was on a short-run sampler. Only today did I learn that there were two other samplers put out by Atlantic! -- Fantailfan (talk) 17:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Well... I suggest a revert but add the tidbits of information I found ("Immigrant Song" and D&B Together catalogue numbers, as well as the links to The Sun, Moon & Herbs and One Way...Or Another and infobox links between the Atco to the first New Age of Atlantic samplers). Since there are no standards (aside from the obvious ones) as long as the information is presented coherently and relatively completely, I have no problem with your layout.

BTW, is there a theme to your Samplers? -- Fantailfan (talk) 17:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism of Mr. Jackson's wikipedia entry

Hey, sorry about that MJ vandalism thing. I left my laptop alone for five minutes and my 'humorous' friends decided to mess around. Hasn't happened before, won't happen again... :S Max xxx (talk) 23:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Reasons to stay

Its things like this that make me realise i AM doing a good thing at wikipedia. ;-). --Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 00:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yesterday i began questioning why i was here. Ive just put the Madonna article up for reassessment, as a read it more and more i reaslised how bad it had gotten. Because its main contributers had long left wikipedia it quickly deteriated. I realised that all my work will be destroyed the minute i leave. It made me question what the point of doing this is. Then after seeing those barnstars i realised i had made someone elses experience here more enjoyable. Maybe that counts for more than a GA article. --Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 01:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

LOL

[11]. --Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 21:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Who knows, too much time on their hands i imagine. --Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 22:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Ive put a preposal up on the List of best selling artists talk page. Your vote or "Consensus building" is appreciated. Cheers. --Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 17:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Valuative

Note that this is yet another sockpuppet of User:DavidYork71, who has something over 300 of 'em. (Good grief!) Cheers anyhow... Wwheaton (talk) 01:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

AWB Access

Sorry to rush in. I left a request Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage for AWB Access. Kindly grant me the same -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 15:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 21	19 May 2008	About the Signpost

Pro-Israeli group's lobbying gets press, arbitration case	Board elections: Voting information, new candidates
Sister Projects Interview: Wikibooks	WikiWorld: "Hodag"
News and notes: Russian passes Swedish, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Good article milestone	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 22	26 May 2008	About the Signpost

Board elections: Candidate questions	Single User Login opt-in for all users
Community-related news sources grow	WikiWorld: "Tomcat and Bobcat"
News and notes: Wikimedia DE lawsuit, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured sounds	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 (talk) 07:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Berwick

I've edited on Wikipedia long enough to know the rules mate, and i removed nothing with a reference, Gaelic has no attested evidence of speech in Berwick, therefore it is redundant, you may aswell put the Gaelic translations for other English towns, no? I will remove the Gaelic translation and it will require a source. Gazh (talk) 20:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

re-The Black Adder GA review

Hi, thanks for having a look over this. I've hopefully managed to sort out most of the problems and have replied after your comments on the talk page. Feel free to inform me if there's anything else that needs improving. Bob talk 20:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Bull sh*t

"TimothyHorrigan" - this editer has a long history of trying to damage the MJ article. He doesnt actually like Jackson and had a dispute some while back on the talk page saying that the article was too positive in Jackson favour. He lost this dispute and ever since has been adding really ultra mushy positive statements into the article, he is either trying to damage the articles credibilty or is trying to make a point. --— Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 21:39, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I only just realised he was doing it, i just thought he was a typical fan, however now ive seen earlier talk page discussions and he was arguing that the article was too nice to MJ, now all he does after lossing that argument is try to paint Jackson as a god. Hes up to something. You should read his edit the other day about Jackson being a higher king than Elvis, just stupidness. --— Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 21:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

On other occasions he just adds outright lies. [12]. This is not true and he wrote it when everyone knew full well what the cover was like. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 21:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey do you think its a good idea to set up a Q and A for the MJ talk page, a lot of the same questions keep getting asked, particularily on the topic of photos. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 16:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, ill set something up, when im done i would appreciate it if you read through for mistakes, particularily if ive made incorrect statements about policy. At the moment this ip adress is causing such a mess of that talkpage lol. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 17:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Would you mind checking this please. Cheers. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 01:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Trying to put a positive spin on the madness that is wiki picture policy. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 01:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Edward Eways

Hi Rod, I feel that Edward Eways should be on the notable list. He is very active in his community. Some of the people you have on the Port Chester page that are notable don't even live in town???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.103.93.62 (talk) 11:37, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Being active in a community does not confer notability. The criteria in this policy do. This has already been considered by the community and rejected. That's not to say that if further reliable sources come forward he won't have a page, and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a great argument to use. My advice is to go away, do some research, and see if you can find reliable sources confirming his notability. Otherwise, this is close to being intolerable. --Rodhullandemu 11:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rod we are sorry if this debate and comments on the community figure Edward Eways.In Port Chester/Rye Brook area Edward Eways is like a local star that has given a lot to his community. We understand your points and we will do more research on Mr Eways career and decide we he stands. Thank you for letting our group have this dialoge about Ed Eways. Keep up the great work!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.103.93.62 (talk) 13:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC) Rod this will be are last comment on here. Thank you for allowing this. Ed Eways work will stand the test of time. Weather he is on a notable list or not does not change the projects that he has done and the positive impact.

That's fine. If he's been mentioned (in some detail, not just in passing) in several reliable sources such as reputable newpspapers, books, etc, and meets the requirements of WP:BIO, then he can have an article. I'm sure he's entirely admirable, but still needs to meet our requirements. --Rodhullandemu 14:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

MJ archives

Im cleaning out those MJ archives, then an admin is going to remove the stuff from the site. Ive noticed though that archive 6 and 7 are identical, there is a small discussion at the bottom of #7 where an edit says they made the duplication but other than that they are identical. 7 could just be removed. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 16:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, would you mind, i have no idea how to redirect, im guessing thats admin stuff anyhow. --— Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 17:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, crap, i messed that up. --— Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 17:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Bollocks, look what i did, now i see my mistake. here. --— Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 17:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

lol, im embarrassed. Dont laugh. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 17:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

ok, it looks like 6 and 7 are ok now, i think the redirect has worked, remind me NEVER to try that again. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 19:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Dauphinee = DavidYork71 ??

Just noticed this. My guess is any action is premature? But bears watching. Alas, Wwheaton (talk) 22:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

He's certainly pushing a POV and I think in case like this the evidence has to be cast-iron, even if the people involved are dead, and perhaps more so, because they aren't around to contradict. I've never approved of either making bricks without straw, or clutching at straws. I note he's raised this at the LGBT project page, but my experience of that project is that those editors who are members don't "out" people against the totality of the evidence. --Rodhullandemu 01:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)