User talk:Alexf/Archive 5
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
juninho page
dont change the number of goal this number is the the total goal of juninho from the site of lyon team is the real source! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.53.67.30 (talk) 22:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- Then, if you say "it's the real source" why don't you please properly source your edits as you have been asked? Alexf42 22:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Your Edits...
|
The Invisible Barnstar | |
| Several times I post a report to WP:AIV, this user seems to block him. He has also done other great work, but has never been recognized for it (with only 2 barnstar, which is a hundred less than what you deserve). For that, I - Milk's Favorite Cookie hereby award you this Barstar. Congrats! - Milk's Favorite Cookie 23:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC) |
Barnstar
I have no idea how it is that you have gone so long with no barnstars and are now going to receive two within a few hours, but I came to this page to give you one for your tireless contributions on WP:AIV and am going to, even if Milk's Favorite Cookie just did so as well. So, enough preamble:
|
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
| For your tireless and quality management of WP:AIV reports, I bequaeth you with the Working Man's Barnstar. Not only are you swift in your response to reports, you are also always fair, declining when it is warranted. Keep it up the great work! SorryGuy Talk 02:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC) |
- Well, I do not know why but I never got them before. Now two in one day? Wow. Muchly appreciated sir. -- Alexf42 02:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
An IP that may be sidestepping your user account block on Josh Allain
Last evening you placed a one month block on Josh Allain (talk · contribs) thank you!. I suspect that Mr Allain may be sidestepping his blocks through IP 69.249.244.175 (talk · contribs) note the mirrored edit history between the two. I have placed a IP sock tag on the IP talk page. If this IP suddenly becomes active on the same articles Josh Allain is known to frequent I will follow up with a proper SSP report ( with the help of my good friend Scarian ) I just wanted to keep you up to date on the situation as you are the last admin to issue blocks for the Josh Allain user account. Have a nice day! 156.34.142.110 (talk) 13:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ok. Watchlisted. -- Alexf42 13:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. Just as a follow-up and to give you some pre-history... Josh Allain began life as IP 68.80.30.39. Now, as I suspect, he edits from IP 69.249.244.175. According to geobytes both IPs are from Aston, Pennsylvania. Some editor's habits are so predictable it's just too easy :D. I keep an eye on "all things Living Colour" (among many other music articles that Mr. Allain like to frequent)... should I spy any Aston, Penn IPs popping up... I will keep you informed. Thanks again! 156.34.142.110 (talk) 13:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I know you said AiV... but I never have much luck there. 69.249.245.53 (talk · contribs) from Aston Pennsylvania is currently active on Wikipedia... and that's an IP sock for Mr. Josh Allain. Just in case you want to start keeping track. 156.34.226.160 (talk) 22:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Request Ban for User talk:82.47.141.134
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Artificial_intelligence&diff=194284465&oldid=194279025 - Isn't there a more permanent ban that you could make to that IP address? He/she has quite a ban record. I realize it could be more than one user, but with the continual one month bans it's not like anyone else from that IP has much of a chance of becoming a constructive wikipedian.--Sparkygravity (talk) 23:25, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- I understand but it cannot be done in this case. A ban is different from a block which is what they received. As you already know, it is an anonymous IP address so it could be different users. If they continue, they'll get a longer block. Keep it watchlisted and report to AIV if warranted. Thanks for your help. -- Alexf42 23:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I blocked this guy last year for 3 months but as soon as he came back he started vandalising again. Since then he has had several warnings and a short block but he continues to vandalise. It is clear that whenever he is allowed to edit he will damage the encyclopaedia. My feeling is that a longer period than 1 month is called for (I would have considered 6 months this time round but possibly settled on another 3 months). I wonder if you would reconsider the period, please? TerriersFan (talk) 23:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, I think that it is worth adding that whilst some IP addresses are dynamic and may be allocated to many users, it's clear from the edit history that here we have a static IP operated by one specific user. TerriersFan (talk) 00:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- You may be right, but you can always block him again for a longer period in a month (or right now if you think it is warranted, no problem there). I have him watchlisted and will give him a longer block next time if he starts again. Feel free to disagree and re-block now for as long as you think it should be to protect the project. -- Alexf42 00:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for that. Some of his edits are very damaging so I have upped it to 3 months. We'll see how it runs. TerriersFan (talk) 00:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- You may be right, but you can always block him again for a longer period in a month (or right now if you think it is warranted, no problem there). I have him watchlisted and will give him a longer block next time if he starts again. Feel free to disagree and re-block now for as long as you think it should be to protect the project. -- Alexf42 00:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Likely impersonator of 63.87.6.102
Hi. You recently blocked 63.87.6.102 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) for repeatedly adding the same nonsense to this page and now Yamchaken (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) has inexplicably done the same at least once. I'm not sure if 63.87.6.102 (or a similar ip) created the account so could you look into it? I'm watching this discussion so let me know if you need diffs or anything. Regards, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Will do but it is better to watch then warn appropriately, then report to AIV than gathering the attention of one admin who may be offline at the time. -- Alexf42 10:40, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Comment
This comment is in regards to a page you deleted, User talk:Mcfly85. This absolutely should be undone and restored, along with his old userpage User:Mcfly85. I feel this user should not be leant the courtesy of WP:VANISH and have his pages deleted, as he is in bad standing with the community having created multiple abusive sockpuppets in the past. — Save_Us † 10:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Airport Template
I'd like to request that you remove the protection to the US Airports template. It was updated by a single user (Fletch) who is involved with one of the sites included. He is probably not aware of the admonition against these types of edits. Perhaps a simple warning to him would solve this issue. He has been open with his affiliation and candid with his comments during a protracted discussion in the template's talk page. I don't believe there has been any reason to believe that this link has been or may become a target of vandalism. We would like to continue our discussion about the future of this template.
I would like to bring a complaint of my own to your attention. It is my understanding of Wiki guidelines that affiliated users should not add their own sites to External Links. It IS suggested that these same users submit their sites for open consideration in the associated talk page. When such a discussion began for this particular page, two primary editors stuck their fingers in the ears and indicated they didn't want any change to the template. Rather than be a part of the discussion and objectively look at the pros and cons, both made knee-jerk decisions to oppose ANY changes. Their repeated comments universally ignored the merits of the points discussed - instead they openly and repeatedly tried to squelch the discussion with the prophetic implication that nothing would change, no matter what the discussion produced. Is this proper behaviour in Wikipedia? And is it possible to get objective standards established for inclusion in this template? Thanks for your consideration. Gladtohelp (talk) 13:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm. Just came in on my lunch hour. What you say has merit at prima facie. Let me look at it later from home as it requires some checking. I apologize for not having the time this issues deserves right now, but certainly will do later. If you cannot wait and need an immediate action please alert other admins at AN/I. Thanks for your understanding and for helping Wikipedia. -- Alexf42 17:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Alex, I would like to add a word here myself since it appears I'm the "guilty" party. While there is nothing that I found in the Wikipedia guidelines that I violated outright, I certainly did push the boundaries. That said, I think in this particular case, based on the actions and words of the incumbents, the boundaries need to be pushed. However, I am the wrong person to do that. I will refrain from this point forward in editing the template, but I'd like to continue the discussion with the other Wikipedians. I'm hoping that you'll read through the discussion on the Airport Template page and provide some truly neutral feedback.Fletch07 (talk) 19:58, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- I spent some time going through the postings and the talk page. I see mainly editors Fletch07, Dual Freq and Gladtohelp involved in a discussion here. I am familiar with SkyVector, NOAA/NWS, and FAA. I am not familiar with NavMonster which may well be a case of spam, and I do not know if there is a WP:COI here also but I will AGF and assume not. It is preferred to keep external links to a minimum and provide relevant information that is not present on the page. Remember that Wikipedia is not a collection of links. Are that many sites needed? I will have to let the experts decide on that. You are all interested parties and I assume, experts on this subject to a certain degree. As the Talk page of the template is not protected, discussion can continue there to try to hammer out an agreement in an amicable way without having to go to dispute resolution. I see this has already started in the New_Template section. Once you all agree on something you can pop into RFPP and request unprotection. Good luck. -- Alexf42 02:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Of the two editors primarily looking to modify the template, one editor admits they are affiliated with Navmonster and has very few edits beyond the quest to add those links to wikipedia. The other editor has a few more edits, but has an affinity for FlightCentral.net. Neither editor appears to be long term or interested in helping to improve wikipedia, outside adding their own weblinks. Last December, another editor described their efforts to modify the template as "thinly veiled attempts at promoting (a) web site." I tend to agree since a number of other single edit accounts showed up one saying they "heard the debate was going on" and another that signed the same way as Gladtohelp. I prefer the template be left as is until some more established WikiProject Aviation / Airports editors agree it is time to be changed. Thank you. --Dual Freq (talk) 02:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- DualFreq and Alexf, I'm going to make one more post here on Alex's talk page, and then we can take this back to the template discussion page. I'm glad that DF spelled out his position like this, because I think it points to some fundamental barriers to modernizing this template, and making Wikipedia an environment that keeps up with the times.
- 1) There seems to be a chicken and egg irony here. I need to make edits to gain credibility, but I need to have credibility to not just make edits, but also just to be listened to and have my opinion count? This is a no win for new editors, and a very strong wall for the status quo. How do things change unless new people come along with new ideas? A lesser irony, but also worth pointing out, is that the practice of keeping out people with COI keeps out the very people with the requisite expertise that makes Wikipedia valuable for everyone.
- 2) DF, an incumbent editor, invokes a quote from another editor (also a senior editor). This has no bearing on anything and does nothing to further the discussion. In fact, this is classic logical fallacy (irrelevant conclusion).
- 3) DF, TouchdownTurnaround, and Bovine1 have never truly addressed the points that I and others have made about why the template ought to be changed. The only arguments made have been ad hominem. Repeated attempts to structure the discussion around the merits of creating a new template have been met with claims of spamming, conflict of interest, and the like.
- 4) DF claims to know my intentions, and my future contribution potential to Wikipedia! This is classic Red Herring argument, and is irrelevant to the discussion of the merits of a Wikipedia editing change.
- 5) DF would like to enlist the help of aviation experts. That's actually what I, and GladToHelp are. Yes, we're new, but that doesn't automatically mean we have nothing to offer. Moreover, other commentators have stopped by the discussion page to voice their opinions, but they're summarily being dismissed as spammers, single-purpose editors, etc., in favor of the opinions of the incumbents.
Alex, I apologize again for "polluting" your Talk page, but I felt strongly that you ought to see the nature of this discussion first hand. I don't know the affiliations or motivations of DualFreq, TouchdownTurnaround or Bovine1, nor have I ever asked, as this is beside the point. And I've certainly never accused them of having a COI. There seems to be an unwritten rule that a long-time editor cannot possibly have a conflict of interest. However, if one did, they'd be in a VERY powerful position to stonewall anyone else via reverts and requests for locking a page. This template was created so long ago that trying to reconstruct the history of it is close to impossible. Lobbying for the status quo is not productive, especially when it's based on illogical arguments. I hope this exercise takes us to a better place.Fletch07 (talk) 03:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hi again Alex. All of this argument about this template could be finalized if we could simply implement an objective measure, i.e. a set of measurable requisites, that sites selected for inclusion in the template should meet. Forget all affinities, establish criteria, then accept those that pass the test. Let's take the unbiased approach. Gladtohelp (talk) 11:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)gladtohelp
- Please, guys, I understand your concerns and also as an editor I would very much would like to see the project improve, but this page is not the place. Please continue the discussion in the Talk page for the template and if you require assistance there are admin pages for that. Thank you for your understanding. -- Alexf42 11:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Sesame Street
Hello, Nick. I saw that you reverted the edit by Alexf, and some text at the bottom displayed "na na na na, na na na na, ELMOS WORLD!" I thought it was unconstructive and I reverted it. I hope I didn't hurt your feelings. SchfiftyThree 22:32, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- I was wondering about that and saw it had been fixed. A mistake maybe? Please don't restore vandalism, look beforehand. Thanks! -- Alexf42 11:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- No, you certainly didn't hurt my feelings. I was actually trying to revert back to this edit, in order to quickly restore the free license picture that was recently removed from the article (which I see has been strangely deleted from Commons, despite being a free license picture). -- Zanimum (talk) 15:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Panther Express Restore
Can you please restore the Panther Express page? Panther Express has over 800 nodes in 15 cities around the world.
Today, they announced that hey have raised a second round of financing of $16M.
http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/2/panther_express_closes_16_million_series_b
The page needs to be edited/updated and I will do so once it's restored.
Thanks - Ryan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rnitz (talk • contribs) 01:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Article has been restored and PRODded. That gives you five days to ascertain notability. One issue you have to be very careful with is that you seem to have a COI issue here. Before editing please read BFAQ and COI. You must ascertain notability before another editor challenges it and the article gets deleted as I cannot offer any guarantees. -- Alexf42 02:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: Template:US-airport protection
Thanks for letting me know, but I think I speak for most admins when I say that such notifications aren't necessary - especially for me as I seem to have protected everything in sight. :-D east.718 at 03:26, February 28, 2008
Block of 125.254.116.99
I am embarrassed to realize that I may have made an error in asking for a block on this user. I was in a hurry to make an appointment when I saw it, and did not see that the crudity was put up by the user and then quickly reverted within a couple of minutes, with a note so stating. Of course there are a zillion prior offenses, but I suppose they might have been by someone else on a school computer or some such. Anyway, though I should at least let you know, in case I was too hasty. Sorry. Should I post an apology on his talk page? That could create problems too, maybe. Bill Wwheaton (talk) 06:00, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- No. He was going to get a block soon. What is questionable is your "Going, going,... THROUGH THE EVENT HORIZON!!". That is a little over the top. Be polite, be civil. Remember that blocking is not punishment, but a means to protect the project. Happy wiking. -- Alexf42 11:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
You blocked me, but only some of my edits got reverted. How strange. --76.124.20.123 (talk) 20:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Re: User talk:75.1.23.79
If you look at this Mmbabies abuse report, you will know that they have contacted the Texas AG's office and the FBI. That should clear it up. Momusufan (talk) 03:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry for the confusion, probably won't accomplish anything but yeah. Momusufan (talk) 03:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I would like to request that the talk page be reverted back to here; the reason being is that Mmbabies have vandalised again, and the page was protected before any opportunity was made to undo it. Keep the protection, of course, but we cannot turn this into a "monument" of his dirty deeds. -- azumanga (talk) 19:05, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- The statement you are asking to revert serves no purpose. Let the issue rest. -- Alexf42 19:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Just for the record, February 29 is yesterday, and there has been significant vandalism to this point (it showed up on Wikirage's highest vandalized articles). As such, could I ask you to keep an eye on this page and protect if vandalism resumes? The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Actually is 2 days ago. I already watchlisted it and I already follow Robert E. Lee too so I'l act on both today if they resume. Thanks! -- Alexf42 13:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Page protection
Alex, thanks for protecting Maya Angelou. This article seems to be vandalized a great deal. It's been semi-protected in the past, which has worked to decrease it for a few months, but in a few months, it returns to a high level. I suspect that it will get worse as we get closer to Ms. Angelou's 80th birthday in early April. As an administrator, could you please keep an eye on the article? It may need a more permanent protection. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 19:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep it watchlisted. We do not do preventive protection. When and if you see excessive vandalism please relist and ask for a longer term. -- Alexf42 19:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry
Am i ever allowed add or edit to stuff??
Tiernan 2/3/2008
- Sure. Just follow the policy and guidelines. Please read about verifiability, reliable sources and be familiar with the Five Pillars of Wikipedia. We'd like you to be a good editor. Also, please remember to sign your posts in Talk with four tildes ~~~~. -- Alexf42 21:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Block of User:Mkernatmkerndotcom
Can you look at this again. It was his own content that he was adding and removing. Just a new user getting used to editing. His removal of his own content shouldn't be tagged as vandalism. --Stephen 01:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- I re-studied the unexplained text deletions and granted the unblock request. Thanks for the heads up. -- Alexf42 02:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Vandalism
I just undid vandalism on your userpage, I was going to update your vandalism userbox but it's protected, so you had better do it yourself. Regards English peasant 21:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I had just udated it when you were writing. Also I was posting the sock warning to the guy when you posted your warning. LOL -- Alexf42 21:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Almirante Brown players
Erm, they would all pass notability, but I wouldn't reccomend creating them, Brown are likely to go straight back down to Primera B Metropolitana next season due to the 20 point deduction. It's pretty hard to keep track of players once they drop into the Argentine lower leagues and hardly anyone keeps Argentine player articles uptodate, they are too busy creating articles about youth team players for English clubs. These Almirante Brown guys will most likely dissapear into obscurity, but for all I know may end up in the Primera, highlights of Primera B Nacional games are pretty rare in England and it's pretty hard to judge how good they are from es:wiki! I'd say there are plenty of much more important historical figures without articles see all the pre-1974 World Cup templates and the Primera División Argentina topscorers article for red links that are much more notable. There are also loads of Copa America winning players from the early years (see rsssf). On the other hand, if you want to create them, and are prepared to check for transfers every so often, don't let my reservations stop you. All the best, as always. English peasant 22:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- I see your point. That's why I asked. I have plenty of articles I want to translate and only do so when time and mood agree. I will abstain on these. Thank you. -- Alexf42 22:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello!
Skeletor 0 (talk) 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. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
User:Florentino floro
Dear Alexf I am contacting you about a user who I believe should be blocked. His name is User:Florentino floro. I know our community is supposed to assume good faith, but I have reason to believe he is criminally insane. You can totally shoot me down for this but I am concerned about letting him have access to the site. For more information, please look at these references: [1] [2] Thank you Skeletor 0 (talk) 03:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm. The first one is to an article, the second link is a 404. In any case the proper place to report this and gather admin attention is AN/I. == Alexf42 11:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry I am a bit new but thank you for the reply. Skeletor 0 (talk) 17:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Robert Hooke article
Thanks for the protection you added to the Robert Hooke article. In mid-February I spent some major, quality time rewriting essentially all parts of the article, only to see it beaten to death by vandals since then. That's not a situation that makes me want to devote time to this project, and certainly not to that particular article. So again, thanks for your help. - Astrochemist (talk) 04:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- It happened to a few I've done myself. Don't know why these kids single this one out. Don't let them deter you. -- Alexf42 10:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
The goth emo slut kid? If s/he wants to call him or herself a goth emo slut kid, what's the harm? It's not like any of those are even curse words. —Wknight94 (talk) 11:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- If you agree with the word slut in the name, be my guest and release it. :) -- Alexf42 12:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Page Deletion
You deleted the page Blue Chip Expert which was still being created. Per the reference below I would ask that you please undo the speedy deletion and let me finish the article with all references and relevance.
Deletion is not required if a page meets these criteria. Before nominating an article for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved, reduced to a stub, merged or redirected elsewhere or be handled with some other action short of deletion. If this is possible, speedy deletion is probably inappropriate. Contributors sometimes create articles over several edits, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its creation if it appears incomplete. Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criteria the page meets and consider notifying the page's creator. [[3]]
Thanks, Djkwk7 (talk) 18:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- If you are working on the article you should put a maintenance tag on it to let other editors know. If an article of yours is tagged for speedy deletion and you want to keep it you should put a {{hangon}} tag on it and immediately explain your reasons in the Talk page.
- In stead of posting an article that is almost empty of all content like the one you created, and not even categorized or marked as a stub, you should work it offline or in your user space until it has some information to ascertain its notability. Also, the article as it stood at CSD time it was a toss-up between A7 (notability) and G11 (advertisement), both reasons for deletion. I have restored the article as per your request. I cannot guarantee that other editors will find it valuable or tag it for CSD or PROD. Go at it and see what hapens. Happy wiking. -- Alexf42 19:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Neurocam International
Although I can understand why you'd have deleted Neurocam International, I think it'd have been better to mark it as unverifiable as opposed to moving forward with speedy deletion. I don't believe there is any reason why this would break any of wikipedia's requirements for inclusion.
There is no rule against the inclusion of a verifiable secret organization. If there was, your same exact reasoning would allow the speedy deletion of United States Secret Service, as it also has no verifiable citation. My suggestion is that this article be brought back, and marked as unverifiable. These instances are why that specific marking was invented. I would even be happy to correctly update the article myself.
Sorry to be a pain in your neck, but I feel that my reasoning has some sense to it. monokrome (talk) 10:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- It was not a speedy deletion but a proposed deletion. As such it run its course for five days and nobody came in to salvage the article by proving its notability and as you say, verifiability, which might be harder. A comparison of this suppossed organization with the US Secret Service is ludicrous. If you strongly feel the article has merit, you can always request a hearing at Deletion review. If you do, I'll be happy to explain the administrative action there. -- Alexf42 13:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Bullshit
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bullplop
Now let's not just go around deleting someone's edits because they've had a bit of fun with Wikipedia in the past. If you're getting rid of that edit because it's unsourced, than we can just go ahead and delete 95 percent of the information on the page.
I would hope that my edit didn't just get arbitrarily deleted because some of my posts haven't been ::gasp:: 100 percent serious!
It seems to me that if you're going to do "something useful for the world" and mod Wikipedia, at the very least you could double-check information before you go slashing away peoples' work. Doesn't that kind of defeat the point of open-source? 24.147.175.186 (talk) 03:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- Urban Dictionary? That's not a reliable source. And a word invented by little girls? Please... -- Alexf42 11:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Jocelyn Alvarez
I was editing Jocelyn Alvarez to move the {{hangon}} tag that Latinmeetsjazz had placed on their user talk page in error. I saved my edit, recreating the article. In no way am I endorsing that it should be kept, only that because of the {{hangon}} it shouldn't be speedied. As an aside, I can tell from the comments above that you do a fair amount of the heavy lifting, as far as AIV & deletion. Thank you for your efforts. --SSBohio 02:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Alec Martin
Lancashire | Archive | 2000 | April | 11 Why Alec deserves statue! From the Bolton Evening News, first published Tuesday 11th Apr 2000.
I READ with interest and regret your feature concerning the failure of Bolton Council to award a small endowment to the Troubadour of Trotter Town, Mr Alec Martin, in order to support his successful songwriting competition.
Anyone who has ever shopped in Bolton will at some time have thrown a small coin into Alec's guitar case as he busked in the precinct.
Some will remember him as a young singer-songwriter in the bizarre Bolton "hippy" group "Mandella". Others from his long running folk club, "Cloggies", at the Victory Hotel -- what nights they were!
Yet others will recognise him as the chain-smoking harmonica player in a succession of local blues bands.
But his latest incarnation as driving force behind Bolton's Busker's Ball is perhaps his greatest achievement. I have had the privilege of being a judge in two of the songwriting competitions organised by Alec and the array of creative talent they attracted and encouraged was outstanding. Also, the standard of songwriting -- and judging -- was incredibly high.
I feel that as Alec has done so much to keep music live in Bolton for over 20 years he should be acknowledged, celebrated, and supported by Bolton council. Too many pubs and clubs have given way to mind-numbing discos, karaoke, yes, and even quizzes!
Certainly, Alec is a unique, living piece of Bolton's pop culture history. Bolton Council should not only support Alec's noble endeavours but think seriously of erecting a statue or at least preserving his moustache.
Dr Nat Care
New Hall Lane
Heaton
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Archive Home
From the Bolton Evening News http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk © Newsquest Media Group 2000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Buskersball (talk • contribs) 04:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
JUNINHO
why you continue to destroy juninho page???????!!!!!!!look this video the 36 freekicks of juninho!!!!!!!!! http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=8wIeNT2Cc0k —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.16.131.219 (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please be WP:CIVIL. You are accusing me of "destroying" the page. Can you please cite diffs of this supposed "destruction"? If you are referring to my last revert, it was of a different IP Address edit (are you a [{WP:SOCK|sock]]?) and it undid vandalism adding an empty end needless nickname section, de-wikifying height and changing the ntupdate parameter to July 2006. Then you were reverted by another editor for placing the same edit again. That is considered vandalism and you were warned about it. As per your references on YouTube that is not standard WP references. If it is something else, I do not know what you are talking about. Also please remember to sign your posts with four tildes. -- Alexf42 20:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Block
Do you think that this block may need to be reviewed. The IP received one warning, after which they stopped and had not edited for over 5 hours when they were blocked. TigerShark (talk) 19:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Upon review, you are correct. I misread the time. They were warned at 15:34 UTC and had not vandalized since (confusion with EDT). Unblocked. Thanks for the heads up. -- Alexf42 19:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- No probs. Thanks for the quick response. Cheers TigerShark (talk) 19:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh sorry
Sure, I'll stop I didn't mean any offense, personally though, I think that you should lock any possibly controvertial(sp?) religious topics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.159.169 (talk) 01:38, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- With all due respect, that's nonsense. All religious topics are controversial. While Wikipedia is not censored that does not allow you to violate Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. -- Alexf42 01:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Removal of Protection Nomination
Noticed you reverted my nomination for a page protection. I know the formatting is wrong but i dont know how to fix it. Can you fix the formatting instead of remove my request? thanks, sry for the trouble. 72.197.0.32 (talk) 13:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- Will take a look. Please, in the future, always add new posts to Talk pages at the bottom. Thank you. -- Alexf42 13:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
kids choice vandal
Apologies for you being the one to trawl through all those, and thanks. Do you have any better suggestions for dealing with this guy? He's very persistent, I've been reverting him since December. --Bazzargh (talk) 12:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Report him to AIV or if it is a case of sockpuppetry to the proper pages AN/I or WP:SUSPSOCK. -- Alexf42 12:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
About your recent protections
Did you mean semi-protect here? --AAA! (AAAA) 13:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Oirish
I would have thought that you would have had the courtesy to ask me about the article before you decided to remove it. It is a tongue in cheek article but it has/had serious intent. Eog1916 (talk) 16:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- I am sorry if the editor that posted the CSD tag did not inform you as he should have. My job is to delete speedied pages based on their merits. Tongue in cheek articles, while humorous, do not have a place in the project. -- Alexf42 16:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Retrieving Deleted Articles?
Is is possible to pull up deleted articles? Not for the purpose to undelete them, but to simply save it to my hard drive. --UrPQ31 (talk) 04:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, it is possible as long as it is legal, not libelous or defamatory, etc. (please always post new messages at the bottom, thanks). -- Alexf42 11:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Hot
What would it take to get that page permanently semi-protected? It's simply a magnet for 'fun' by anons, all the time, and not limited to a cooling of the heads. Please reply here. --Shuki (talk) 22:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- You may have a point there. Normally we try to minimize the protection of pages as Wikipedia is open to everyone to edit. There are, of course, exceptions and this may be one of them. Wait til the current semi-prot ends on March 30th, and if vandalism resumes at a steady level, please repost to WP:RFPP. In that case I'll second your motion. -- Alexf42 22:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Deletion Review for The Lillian Verner Game Show
An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Lillian Verner Game Show. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. UrPQ31 (talk) 22:09, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Deletion Review for Spishak
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Spishak. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. UrPQ31 (talk) 22:09, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Suggestions
Hi, you recently deleted my wikipedia and I was curious what exactly I wrote that was reason for deletion. Maybe you could give me some suggestions on what I can do different to avoid being deleted. I followed all of the guidelines to avoid being deleted, so I would truly appreciate some suggestions on what can be done. Thank you! Jend1183 (talk) 00:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- Er, I "deleted your wikipedia"? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia based on Wiki software. What I may have deleted in the course of my duties is an article you started or collaborated on. Problem is, unless you point me to the name of the article I have no clue what you are talking about or how to answer your question. Most probably your article was marked for deletion by another editor, either by CSD or PROD as I don't delete AfD, just opine on some of them. If that is the case, we'd have to see what the posting editor's reason was, but I can't unless I know the name of the article in question. Have a good day. -- Alexf42 01:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm from Argentina, I don't speak or write English very well. Independiente and Racing are important clubs in the world, not only in South America. Independietne has got 15 international cups, it's 3rd in the world with Real Madrid (15 cups), and behind Milan (18) and Boca Juniors (17). In Argentina it's the 3rd most popular and the 3rd most champion in the Argentinian League, with 14 leagues (River Plate 32 and Boca Juniors 22). Look this link (in Spanish) of the FIFA [4], in this page Independiente and Racing are classic teams or big teams in the world. Thank you.
- And your point is? First of all, do not delete text from other editor's Talk pages. That is considered vandalism. Second, I'm a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Argentine football and am very familiar with Argentine Football, more than you may think. Your message is not telling me anything new that I do not know. IF you want to add these kinds of edits to pages like you did before, you have to source them properly. You have a link here, why not then provide it in the article where it belongs? Lastly, please always remember to sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~. -- Alexf42 23:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Guilsborough School
Although I love Wikipedia and have done a lot of work on many articles I know nowt at all about the more technical side of it. What I do know is that the Guilsborough School page is being vandalised on a daily basis by what appears to be pupils from the school. Any chance of locking the page? Preferably not so that no-one can edit it but enough security so that morons cannot get at it. Thanks! Cls14 (talk) 00:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- The place to ask for protection is at WP:RFPP. -- Alexf42 00:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
203.161.95.90
thanks for blocking him! :) O keyes (talk) 01:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
After all that discussion at WP:AIV about this user and his one/first/only edit to Dan Glickman, it turns out that several vandals have been adding the exact same edit for a week or so, now. These users were blocked as socks of Erwin Morland per Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Erwin Morland, so - per the quacking - I blocked this user as well. The edit they added, this edit, was identical to vandalism added in this diff from one of the blocked socks. Good call on the warning instead of the block, though the sockpuppetry trumped WP:BITE in this instance. Thanks, UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 17:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. I didn't know about the sock issue until I saw you blocked him for it. I have no problem with that. I abhor racism and antisemitism and the like. It is, to me, the worst type of vandalism you can make, yet I always go by policy and that required a stern warning and then wait to see him trip himself. -- Alexf42 17:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Alex
You are such a wiki-pain! Instead of working on Wikipedia, why don't you go puke out your stinkin' guts?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristy22 (talk • contribs) 18:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Kristy, that's because I believe in the project. Hopefully you might someday and start helping to build a better worldwide encyclopedia. Ddon't forget to sign your posts next time, using four tildes: (~~~~) -- Alexf42 18:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
My talk page
Alexf, why did you delete my talk page? There was nothing wrong with it! You went on my private talk page and disturbed my privacy! How could you! What is wrong with you? I worked so hard on making my talk page! Kristy22 (talk) 18:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Huh? Your talk page: User talk:Kristy22 is alive and well. -- Alexf42 18:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- This user had a misunderstanding about this project and ownership. They created a an attack page in the mainspace which you deleted(and rightfully so). Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 19:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Happy First Day of Spring!
Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~
To spread this message to others, add {{subst:First Day Of Spring}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Vandal
What exactly is a level 4 warning? And what's the template to use it? Thanks. —Victor, Sr. (discussion) (contributions) 21:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- It is preferred to use the standard templates as they have carefully crafted warning language and they are also used by BOTs to determine the warning level and when to auto-report to AIV. Level 1 is mild and a welcome . Lv2 is sterner. Level 3 says Please Stop and warns them there will be a block if they don't stop (generally the minimum needed for a block). Level 4 is a Last Warning. Please see: WP:TT and Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. Also always remember to susbst the templates as indicated in their example pages. -- Alexf42 21:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
authority of Wikipedia
Since when do you get the authority to block people from editing Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristy22 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- Since I became an Administrator. Please remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. -- Alexf42 22:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Removal of trance.nu
Hi Alexf!
Trance.nu is a community with over 60 000 member, been online since 1999 and nets over 10 000 unique visitors daily. I'd like you to reconsider the removal of the page. As i firmly believe that it's of significance and worthy a spot on Wikipedia. Best regards, Tompalomp (talk) 23:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- It may well be, but the article as written, did not assert notability, did not have any reliable secondary sources, and read like an advertisement. An editor posted a speedy deletion request and as nobody placed a {{hangon}} tag and try to salvage it, the article was routinely deleted. -- Alexf42 23:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Ahfaz-ur-Rahman
Is Ahfaz-ur-Rahman notable? Seems like it is, though it looks like it may need a coi tag if it does. -WarthogDemon 03:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
- Might be. You could tag it with WP:COI, and lacking any kind of reliable secondary sources as required to assert notability. -- Alexf42 03:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
- I tagged them, he removed them, and I replaced them. Would it be too rash to bring it up on AfD if he does so again? -WarthogDemon 03:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)