User talk:AlexiusHoratius/Archive 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Confirming changes in a wiki-page

How do I request for other wiki-pages to have an "Accept: require "autoconfirmed" permission" function, just as what you had added to the Same-sex marriage article?
Native94080 (talk) 05:48, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

You can request pending changes protection at Requests for Page Protection. There may be other places as well, but RFPP seems to work okay. (I personally am not too involved with the whole Pending Changes thing, but will put it on when it looks like it would be a good option.) AlexiusHoratius 05:53, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank semi-spam

Thanks for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. Thanks also for reverting vandalism on Manitoba - much appreciated! Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 15:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the protect

I was hoping this nonsense would all be over with soon seeing as this was supposed to be the final season (Claimed by the main character's VA), but the show was just renewed TODAY for a whopping 27 episodes. Woe is me. Heavydata (talk) 01:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Being something of a regular at RFPP, I've become used to the fact that there are legions of IPs obsessed with really peculiar areas of interest: namely results of wrestling matches, chart positions of albums, musical genres of bands, and character/episode lists of TV programs. It's really strange. Nobody really edits stuff like Bolivia or Indus River that much, but hundreds of people go out of their minds over whether a particular series has been renewed or not. AlexiusHoratius 02:01, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


It's on PC, and it doesn't seem to be working - do you think it could be protected now? It's got some pretty consistent vandalism going as of late, 3 or 4 instances since you've declined - I can't really see any constructive IP/new account editing, also. Connormah 23:44, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - much appreciated. Connormah 01:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
No problem. AlexiusHoratius 01:20, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Maryland not labeled on the Mississippi map you placed on Wikipedia

Maryland not labeled on the Mississippi map you placed on Wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:52, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll fix it tomorrow probably. AlexiusHoratius 06:05, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
New version uploaded (I had also left off a label for New Mexico). AlexiusHoratius 21:49, 30 August 2010 (UTC)


THATS MEAN WHY DID YOU SEND ME THAT I HATE CHU —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lovinwiki10 (talkcontribs) 22:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Deleting my subpage

Thanks for deleting User:Edge3/John Lynch! It's much appreciated. Edge3 (talk) 18:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem. AlexiusHoratius 21:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

java program

write a program integer value from user and cheak whether given no is a odd or even? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about; I'm pretty sure you're posting at the wrong place. AlexiusHoratius 05:42, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

One heckuva guy

What's it like as an adult male living with autism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:46, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Hmm - full-on autism is a bit strong - a prematurely jaded misanthrope would be a more apt description. As an adult male living with premature misanthropy along with a general sense of ennui, I'd say life's a 5 out of 10. AlexiusHoratius 18:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Block an IP

Can you block this IP: He (or she) recently vandalized the article Dutch American, and has also vandalized the articles Lent, Breaking wave, History of Japan, and Mariana Trench. has already been warned about getting blocked.

Since it's an IP, it's probably used by numerous users, and that one only vandalized once in the last few months. If they continue, give them another warning or two and then report them to WP:AIV (generally that works faster than going to particular admins). AlexiusHoratius 00:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the map

Hi. Thanks for the map of Califronia. Only saw it now. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 23:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem - don't be afraid to check the Commons category if you think something is missing, there'll be lots of images for larger subjects like California, or check what other similar articles are using. The problem usually comes when a section starts getting too many images, but there looked like there was plenty of room on California. AlexiusHoratius 01:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


  In the area? You're invited to the
   May 2018 Minnesota User Group Meeting
MUG logo proposal C.png
  Date: 31 October 2010
  Time: noon
  Place: Midtown Exchange Global Market,
East Lake Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota
44°56′57″N 93°15′40″W / 44.9493°N 93.2612°W / 44.9493; -93.2612


hi ummm..... I really don't need any of your help but nice meeting you and happy halloweeen :D

Happy Halloween. AlexiusHoratius 20:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Suggestions for next Minnesota meetup?

Hi, Alexius, do you have any suggestions for a next date or place for a Minnesota meetup? I was disappointed to miss last Sunday's meetup once a work meeting coincided with the time announced for the meetup. I would be happy to arrange a meetup soon. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 14:12, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd try to attend if another one were held in the Twin Cities area. (Other areas in MN are probably a bit too far when it comes to distances I'm personally willing to travel - but don't let that stop people from planning a non-TC event, if you want.) AlexiusHoratius 20:43, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

New meetup

  In the area? You're invited to the
   May 2018 Minnesota User Group Meeting
MUG logo proposal C.png
  Date: 20 November 2010
  Time: 1:00-3:30
(click here for full agenda)
R.S.V.P. by Nov. 17 for free lunch + parking
  Place: Minnesota History Center
345 Kellogg Blvd, St. Paul, Minnesota
44°57′00″N 93°06′20″W / 44.95°N 93.1055°W / 44.95; -93.1055

ryan smith of wolfe city texas

Ryan Douglas Smith, born october 29th 1993 Wolfe City Tx, he grew up in this little bo-dunk town and at 4th grade could bench 450lbs. at age 14 he won the UFC fighting championship going against barrack Obama and Sadamm Huesien in a tag team throw down match, he later ran for president but was said to be to awesome for election so they gave him his own name and Rank he was a 8 Star general and leader of the world or King Cockburns as he licked to be called as of november 3rd he fired a blow onto the side of Colton Goodwins face along with the ever so popular Sir Joseph Tucker of Awesometown. He is now in Holding but has plans to break out with Sir Joseph with help from a terrorist by the name of Achmed tajeer. that is all for now folks —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

User conflict in Talk:Spanish Civil War

Dear AlexiusHoratius,

In last weeks, an user appeared in Talk:Spanish Civil War. The discussion between some users (Mamalujo and Sayerslle on NPOV) became a crusade of insults, like "francoist" and similars. I arrived to this discussion through Pius XI's Dilectissima nobis encyclical and I decided to prevent user Xufanc about WP:CIV and WP:NPA. What an error! I talked to him in his user page in catalan, because he had previous conflicts with some users at Catalan WP. At this moment, he is using some siamese IP (at his personal page he says that he's in Thailand) to try to show that there are more users against me (WP:SOC). Please, may you intervene to calm the discussion?

Thank you for all.

Yours faithfully,

Vilallonga (talk) 08:32, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll take a look at it. Give me a few days, as I'm a bit busy in real life right now. (I'm not going to referee at the Spanish Civil War article as far as content is concerned, but if editors are getting out of hand, that can be dealt with.) AlexiusHoratius 17:20, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much AlexiusHoratius. Vilallonga (talk) 09:25, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks & a question

G'day AlexiusHoratius. Thanks for your time in considering my RFP. The dispute resolution process seems to require active participation from both sides, and I believe that the other side isn't interested (he's pointedly ignored or fobbed off compromise offers).

As you probably saw, the other side has reported me for edit warring at WP:AN3#User:Danjel reported by User:AussieLegend (Result: ). Would that be an appropriate avenue to ask for the protection on the article, even if the report is aimed at me? Thanks in advance for your help. -Danjel (talk) 14:22, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I suppose you could, although RFPP is generally the place to go to request protection; other venues should be used if other issues are involved, like WP:3RR or something. The main reason I declined the request is that full protection technically blocks all non-admins (and basically everyone, as admins aren't supposed to be doing major edits to a fully protected page), so it should usually either be a last resort or used to avoid blocking only an IP in a dispute (which isn't really the case here). If only two editors are involved, there are usually other ways of dealing with a content dispute or cases of disruptive editing without blocking out everyone. If both of you are basically requesting that the article be fully protected, my advice would be to imagine that it is and just stop editing it until some sort of wider consensus is found on the talk page. AlexiusHoratius 14:43, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry, merry

Bzuk (talk) 02:13, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Ho ho ho! Merry Christmas to you as well. AlexiusHoratius 19:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

thank you

Thank you for protecting the List of WordGirl Characters article, you have just ended that dispute hopefully. bless you and continue the great work. N.I.M. (talk) 18:59, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem. AlexiusHoratius 19:10, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Flag of the United States.svg

Hello, AlexiusHoratius/Archive 6! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 02:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


Hey, thanks for the protection! There is no way to protect just a portion of a page, is there? CTJF83 chat 02:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Not that I know of; a specific level of protection applies to the whole page or none of it. One could get around this by transclusion, for instance, you could have one page transcluded (and protected at its source) and have another part of the page either unprotected or transcluded from another page with a different level of protection. AlexiusHoratius 02:32, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Don't quite understand that...but basically I want it so the vandals can't even remove User talk:Ctjf83/Header from the top of the page. Probably not possible? CTJF83 chat 02:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
By the transclusion thing I mean that it's possible for an IP to vandalize this page, as it's unprotected, but they can't mess with the code of my talkheader (the box with the army guy) as I've semiprotected it on a separate page and transcluded it here. However, they could still mess with the translusion code here, in other words the placement or visibility of the header, but not the text itself. I'm not sure if there's a way to make it impossible to edit even the placement of a transclusion on a page that is otherwise unprotected. I don't personally know of one, but perhaps ask at the help desk just in case. AlexiusHoratius 02:46, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok, thanks, CTJF83 chat 03:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Pradip Baijal

The current version of the page protected is not neutral, and is libelous. It promotes the point of view being pushed by Ashlonerider; who is a politically motivated editor who has a history of working on biographies. Please revert back to a more neutral version which does not promote a view on Mr.Baijal and sticks to facts. He is one of the most distinguished and successful officers of the Indian Administrative Service. While some controversies have happened recently, none of the conclusions are correct. Let us not try to destroy the reputation of an officer who has served the country for 40 years - based on a Wiki editor's view on what is a very complicated issue in India. I would suggest introducing a neutrally worded protected page; as several paid parties are incentivized to throw muck at a few people involved in the case.

Adminoff (talk) 01:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC) adminoff

The article's talk page would probably be the best spot to discuss this. However, I don't want to lock in any really out-of-bounds BLP violations, so if they exist (that is, potentially damaging statements without sources) let me know about them specifically and I will take a look. AlexiusHoratius 01:55, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Radia has been called the kingpin of the 2G scam. She is just a lobbyist with no real powers, and cannot be the kingpin. Alluding to it is alleging corruption. Not needed as part of Mr Baijal's page. The man has been a distinguished servant for the country.

The issue of conflict of interest is just speculation. There is no conflict of interest, if someone after 4-5 years of retiring from a post works in the same sector. All government permissions were taken. There are innumerable examples of other officers. There is no source for it, other than speculative media articles.

There are repeated references to certain companies being clients of Niira Radia firm. Firstly, he did not work in that firm, but in an affiliate. Ms Radia's firm had more than 200 clients, including 10 of the top 20 clients. It does not mean someone is corrupt or is taking advantage of his position. Fact of the matter is - Mr Baijal is a subject expert, and not more. He is a retired officer, with no powers. Ashlonerider has inserted these malicious comments just to give an impression of culpability. No formal complaint, or chargesheet has been issued against either Mr Baijal or Ms Radia.

None of the policy changes can be characterized as flip flops. That again is media sensenationalism. Here is a man who has been awarded as a role of the regulator. The US government has conferred praises. He has won the award as the best regulator. All policy changes impact different players - but the overwhelming number of people believe it was done to the benefit of the consumer (which is the charter for the government)

Mr Baijal has his own website - the reference to which has been deleted ( (talk) 18:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC) arjunagra

The article looks like a bit of a general mess in both directions, pro and anti. The phrase 'flip-flop' isn't encyclopedic, in my opinion, and the word 'controversial' doesn't need to be in the first sentence. But the government did raid the guy's house, according to the first reference. I mean maybe it's political and maybe he is innocent, but the government searching the house of some sort of former high official seems at least notable enough for a mention. In other words, the article needs a lot of work, but simply removing all of the non-glowing material seems like whitewashing. AlexiusHoratius 19:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I do not dispute that the government raided his house. But it must be put in context. The government raided the house of nearly all government officials in the telecom ministry as there had been an alleged scam. The article is trying to insinuate (the current version atleast) that everything he has done is somehow linked to something wrong. If the article is to be factual, then one should talk about the fact that his house was raided, but making judgements on other things; or somehow insinuating that he helped certain companies is not correct. The current protected version is highly biased, especially at a time when journalists are using wikipedia to write further profiles on the person. If you look at his achievement segment, it is clear that he has received incredible salutations from highly credible sources. Ashlonerider has just referenced some highly contentious news articles as a reference point. If you look at his edit history, it is pretty clear that he is specifically trying to make this article more controversial and POV directed; in an attempt to libel and accuse. I urge you to reverse those changes.

Arjunagra (talk) 02:58, 14 January 2011 (UTC) arjunagra

Perhaps you're right - but the issues brought up sound more like a job for dispute resolution than obvious BLP violations. That said, the BLP noticeboard may be of use in this matter as well. Beyond that, I don't think I'd be of much further use on the article, as my knowledge of the article's subject and issues are really limited. AlexiusHoratius 03:15, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Standard Chinese - originally Standard Mandarin

You move protected this page, upon my request at WP:RFPP to stop page moves while waiting for a move request to close. Thought I'd drop you a note to say that the move request has now been closed (and page moved) so you may want to reconsider the protection. I would understand if you decide to leave it in place however. Dpmuk (talk) 01:01, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Now unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 01:09, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

If you're around

...can you please take a look at this? Thanks and kind regards. Wifione ....... Leave a message 05:19, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem. AlexiusHoratius 05:23, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


you took a picture of a manufacturer of ethyl alcohol...which company was that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onyx2011 (talkcontribs) 16:30, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what exact company it was; I just took a picture from a distance while it was under construction. The plant is located in the eastern half of Turner County, South Dakota. I'm pretty sure it was just off of SD 44, but it could be US 18 instead (it was three and a half years ago and I can't remember exactly which one.) I don't really know any more specifics, perhaps looking around on the internet will yield more information as to the specific company. AlexiusHoratius 18:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
If you're still around, I just looked it up on Google Earth, and it's the one on SD 44 between Chancellor and Lennox. AlexiusHoratius 21:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


Hi, Alexius. Do Wikipedia rules allow to protect again, and for a much longer time (several months, at least), the article about Tecumseh? Hope you'll do as soon as possible, and wonder how one can foolishly enjoy soiling an article by senseless editings, that way! Thank you. --Jeanambr (talk) 06:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to hold off for just now; there have only been a couple incidents since the article was unprotected a few days ago, and the vandalism now is much lighter than it was when I protected it. It is on my watchlist though, so if it gets out of hand again I can take care of it or another editor can make a request at WP:RFPP for a longer period of protection. AlexiusHoratius 15:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Kristi Noem

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kristi Noem. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

  1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
  2. Editors violating the rule will usually be blocked for 24 hours for a first incident.
  3. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. AlexiusHoratius 05:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

PS - yes, I'm giving myself this warning, to head off some other ponce doing it first. I'm trying to maintain the article until a consensus is reached, as it seems anons aren't able to read capitalized text on both sides of the entry in question. AlexiusHoratius 05:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Well as you stated in one of the edit summaries, "TEXT IN CAPS IS HARD TO READ." I THINK THAT PUT IT RATHER WELL. Sorry, forgot to turn off the caps lock there. I hope you could still read what I wrote. But more seriously, maybe her article should be semi-protected. There seems to be a bunch of anons(or socks possibly) who are willfuly ignoring your comments around the subject matter. sdgjake (talk) 16:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, it's probably a good time for me to extricate myself from the situation. Others are working on it and like you said there is always RFPP (I'd be a bad choice for someone to protect the article, as I'm rather involved already, though). The funny part about the whole thing is that my grandma's alma mater actually is Hamlin High School, or at least where people went from Hayti in the late 40's (don't know if it was consolidated yet, but I'm pretty sure I remember her saying she went to Hamlin High School.) AlexiusHoratius 22:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Dennis Genpo Merzel is happening again... Please have another look. Protection expired, and the shit hit the fan. Drmies (talk) 20:55, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Before a bunch of IPs were involved so semiprotection calmed everything down, but only autoconfirmed users have been editing since the semiprotection lapsed. At this point it's probably a WP:DR issue more than a protection one, as it would have to be a long period of full protection, and I don't think the situation warrants that for now. AlexiusHoratius 23:09, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
The dust has settled now, and I agree with you. I'm not even sure if there is much of a dispute now that there is so little content. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


Vandalizing is considered far worse than that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism can be a somewhat relative term. I would consider calling a sitting governor a "retard" to be vandalism. You obviously disagree. There it is. AlexiusHoratius 06:14, 23 February 2011 (UTC)


Hi there, you recently denied my request for semi-protection of Austan Goolsbee due to insufficient recent activity. I am wondering if you could give me an idea of when that threshold would be reached? The section has been blanked again since I posted the request yesterday. Thanks - Pictureprovince (talk) 13:11, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

It's not so much that there is a clear threshold; but generally I'd need to see more disruption to fully protect an article, as full protection basically blocks out all editing. (It doesn't look like semiprotection would do much, as many of the accounts involved appear to be autoconfirmed - autoconfirmed accounts wouldn't be affected by semiprotection.) AlexiusHoratius 17:28, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarifications - I didn't realize those accounts would be unaffected by a semi-protect. - Pictureprovince (talk) 20:10, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions

Thanks for unprotecting this page...I've made the necessary changes. Turns out most of the changes were in the transcluded "header" subpage, which wasn't protected. Grrr... Kelly hi! 22:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. AlexiusHoratius 22:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)


Thank you for semi-protecting Lent! -Pax85 (talk) 20:56, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem. AlexiusHoratius 20:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Dan Henderson's page

SpecialBarnstar.png The Special Barnstar
I want to thank you for semi-protecting that page. It was becoming real bothersome to revert those edits and they were being done just to be spiteful while hiding behind his anonymous IP. Just wanted to show you some appreciation for doing that. Thank you. Dachknanddarice (talk) 23:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! AlexiusHoratius 00:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Space Bound (Eminem song)

Hey, i saw you protected Space Bound (Eminem song) page. You was a coolest user i ever seen. Anyway, Are you a Wikipedia member? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poseidon1224 (talkcontribs) 13:45, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I edit here, so I guess I'm a member here in that regard, but only as a volunteer. I'm not an employee or anything. AlexiusHoratius 19:03, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


I requested semi-protection of List of people excommunicated by the Roman Catholic Church to protect it from newbies who are quoting a primary document. Wrongly, BTW. Instead I got a full protection with (as always happens) their material locked in. I really don't want to wind up in mediation with these kids, or whoever they are. I did want to emphasize that registered editors may know something and should be listened to. Locking me out for several days will not be helpful towards that goal! :) (Their material BTW says that Nazis were excommunicated by the Catholic Church in 1931. I wish!). Student7 (talk) 14:00, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I usually use full protection in cases like that so people aren't able to come to me and say "Why did you protect this in such a way as to obviously favor one end of a content dispute?". I agree with you that the addition looks suspect, but I don't personally know enough about it that I'm able to go in and come down on one side of the dispute over another. I'd be willing to either entirely lift the protection, at which point either dispute resolution could be attempted or you could re-list the article at RFPP (I won't answer the request or say anything about it to sway other admins one way or another) or I could leave the protection in place (it will expire after a couple more days anyway.) AlexiusHoratius 18:51, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Leave it. We have another discussion between registered editors which was going okay, but was resulting in some changes. It could be helped by a few days respite. Maybe I can summon help for other problem in the same time. As you say, just a few days. It can wait. Thanks again! Student7 (talk) 18:11, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Modern Warfare 3

Hey AlexiusHoratius, Can you semi-protect Modern Warfare 3 page? I heard it was getting vandalized. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poseidon1224 (talkcontribs) 08:56, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Another admin protected it on March 3, and the protection won't expire until the 17th. AlexiusHoratius 17:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Ram Rahim Singh

Hi there. I just wanted to let you know that semi-protecting that page isn't going to help much, I think. There is edit warring going on between users, some of which, I believe, are already auto-confirmed to a point that allows them to continue despite the protection. Check the report I made here for more information. Thanks. Torchiest talkedits 13:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Most of the accounts I checked on one side of the argument were either already blocked or weren't confirmed yet, and it's really suspicious when a bunch of brand new accounts show up on an article with the same M.O. IPs might be different, as they could possibly be different legitimate accounts, but a bunch of brand new registered accounts looks an awful lot like either sockpuppets or meatpuppets. Also, there's only been one edit since I protected the page, so it isn't as if the earlier problems continued at the same pace despite the protection. AlexiusHoratius 18:25, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Carl Wimmer

Thank you Alexius for the protection there. Off2riorob (talk) 21:17, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem. AlexiusHoratius 21:18, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

What's Your Point

I'm using the computer at the lab at the Wilbur Cross Building at UConn. I just saw a poop-up saying I have new messages. I fail to see the point in leaving messages on my talk page that I didn't even know I had. Thank you, kind sir. Sincerely, a UConn student. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uconnjoseph (talkcontribs) 17:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

This was the edit your account made to the Connecticut article. If it wasn't yours, someone else is using a computer you didn't log out of. If you're not a vandal, thats fine and feel free to disregard the message, but be more careful about logging out of your account in the future, as there isn't really any easy way for us to tell who physically made the edit. AlexiusHoratius 17:16, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
The person next to me appears to be on Wikipedia too, but I can't tell if he's using the same account. He's definitely editing though. Could this account be signed in on more than one computer at the same time, possibly all in a row? Thanks for your help man. And how do I sign? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uconnjoseph (talkcontribs) 17:18, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
It's possible, I'm not sure how it works if you're in a computer lab or something; perhaps if one computer logs in all of them are - it might explain what's going on. Probably best to edit from a more secure computer in the future, if this is what is going on. (Accounts that are vandalizing will be assumed as coming from the same person.) Also, you can sign your posts by putting 4 tildes (like this:~~~~) at the end of your message; this will automatically add you name, date, and time. An automatic process is possible (User:Sinebot, which signed one of your earlier posts) but it's usually best to sign your posts yourself. AlexiusHoratius 17:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I've checked on another computer and posted on Strikeforce's wall, and this account was logged in on another computer. I couldn't get a good glimpe of the person who appears to be editing Wikipedia and I don't want to be rude, so I won't go any further with him. Thanks for your help. Uconnjoseph (talk) 17:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC) (Did I do that right/)
No problem. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask. AlexiusHoratius 17:34, 24 March 2011 (UTC)


File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

AlexiusHoratius (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribscreation logchange block settingsunblockfilter log)

Request reason:

I'm stupid. AlexiusHoratius 18:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Unblocked already by wifione. If you still find yourself autoblocked, de-autoblock thineself! Syrthiss (talk) 18:35, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

LMFAO, I'm pretty sure you can just unblock yourself. CTJF83 18:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
I tried, but it said something like "unauthorized", so I figured I'd feed my raging Empire: Total War addiction for a bit and let someone else do it. AlexiusHoratius 19:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Two barnstars in one go

Admin Barnstar.png The Admin's Barnstar
For sticking by rules and not lifting a block on you irrespective of the fact that you had blocked yourself:):):) Wifione ....... Leave a message 18:43, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
BuddhismBarnstarProposal4.png The Buddhism Barnstar
For introducing a new level of administrative patience :):):) Wifione ....... Leave a message 18:43, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Rad - thanks! AlexiusHoratius 19:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on May 14, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 14, 2011. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch* ۩ ۞ 20:59, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer permission

Would you be willing to grant User:Maculosae tegmine lyncis the reviewer permission. She has created 40+ articles in the lat 24 hours alone. mauchoeagle (c) 04:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't really have any problems with it, but I'm not very experienced in granting that - if they want it, tell them to request it at WP:PERM/RW. AlexiusHoratius 05:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Fatty2k10

Even after your warning about this users inappropriate edit summaries to list of digital terrestrial television channels this user has continued with the inappropriate edit summaries but this time the bad summaries are on his own talk page. No matter what what page its on this user still should be civil so I thought you may want to take a look at his talk page edit history.

Also in answer to your warning he wrote: :AM I BOVVERED JASMEET181 CAN GO FUCK THEMSELVES OH AND DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO PRICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This edit has since been removed by another user but if you look at Revision as of 08:54, 29 April 2011 you will see his inappropriate remarks to your warning. (Ruth-2013 (talk) 09:42, 29 April 2011 (UTC))

If they want to blow some steam off in my direction I'll give them a pass - I suppose my warning could have been a bit better. On the other hand, it isn't as though I didn't warn them, so if that sort of thing continues outside their talk page or at someone other than me, I'll block them. For now it's probably best to back off a bit and see if they want to edit constructively or not. AlexiusHoratius 10:11, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Article about DASHKESAN user ALEXUS HORATIUS vandalised

User Alexius Horatius. At 18:44, 28 April 2011 you have protected THIS page justifying this as Persistent vandalism. THISpage contains many preposterous stuff like "In 1988 Armenian population of the Daşkəsən began to arm and attacked Azeri-populated villages" or " During Operation Ring soviet soldiers and Azerbaijani law-enforcement officers erased those gangs" or "In the 3rd century B.C... people engaged in animal breeding rose to Khoshbulag pastures". This triad consists of lie and slander insulting all Armenians around the world (1,300.000 your fellow citizens include). This considerations apart, the article just emptied of many historical facts about this region's Armenian past (from its foundation to 1991 Armenian massacres in it). This article's Etymology section consists of faked-up explanation that regecting to use original name Qarhat and use its azerbaijani translation - Dashkesan. Also current edition of the article you have protected call the native people of the district (who lived there since II cen. B.C. but in 1991 subjected to REAL MASSACRES ) as GANGS. Wikipedia's pages must be clean of slander and lie (used to named here as POV). My any efforts to edit this page as autorized user meet huge number of vandalism to my other edits. What is your real goal AlexiusHoratius, by protecting vandalism and anti-Armenian deletionism? Your political delusions, or remainder of fetid azeri oil??? (talk) 10:59, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

My political delusions are numerous and detailed but have nothing to do with Daşkəsən. If the article has issues take it to the article's talk page and get a consensus for the changes first; a bunch of people/accounts reverting back and forth isn't the way to go. AlexiusHoratius 17:20, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Administrator did correctly protect article. If you have anything to say, register and participate in discussion. You use many IPs to add pov without any neutral source and they cuss everyone who protects pages and opposes your views. Alexis, thank you for protecting and watching the article and asking him to discuss changes. Dighapet (talk) 16:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Current version of the article is a COMPLETE PICKLE (I didn't dare to call it POV). User Dighapet u never doubt, I'm gonna use different IPs and I'll never edit any article as registered user because I'll never allow users saying nonsense like "Dashkesan is in Azerbaijan and history is clear" to vandalize any articles they being out of touch. You have just vanvalized the article by filtering out all historical and ethimological info concerning to Armenians, that's why I call it as vandalism and nothing else. (talk) 00:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Navy SEALs - no section on shooting of pirates in 2009?

Alexius, I see you've semiprotected the Navy SEALs page, so I wanted to run this by you before making a change. In reading the page, I see there's no entry for when the SEALs took out the Somali pirates in 2009.

I could write a brief new entry to be a new section 1.8, pushing the bin Laden entry down to 1.9.

Was there previously a section on this that was deleted? Or is this info not notable enough? Because while reading the article, I remembered this incident, and wondered why it wasn't listed. That makes it notable to me by omission; the SEALs don't come up often in the news, but when they do, you remember it.

Jgroub (talk) 17:45, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't have much experience with that article (I only protected it due to a request at WP:RFPP) but from where I'm standing I don't see why a referenced sentence or two couldn't be mentioned in the article. (You should be able to still edit it as it looks like you should be autoconfirmed.) AlexiusHoratius 18:13, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Cool, thanks. Jgroub (talk) 16:26, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for

the semi-protection on Shiraz. Hopefully that should help things cool down for a little while. Thanks for the quick action, too. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 19:03, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem. AlexiusHoratius 19:04, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Seattle article

I apologize if I am doing this wrong on your talk page, but I wanted to leave you a comment. I saw your last revision on the Wikipedia page for Seattle in the climate section. I don't know how what you deleted even got into the revision I made; I didn't do anything like that. Maybe it was there before, but I didn't see it. Thanks for the revision! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:59, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

The edit I reverted was made by another user (notice that your IP and the one I reverted are different in the edit history for the Seattle article). Your edit looked fine - the vandalism was added after you edited the article. AlexiusHoratius 05:13, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I didn't realize there were so many edits by Pgan002 after mine; looking at the history I saw the start of the IP address and assumed too quickly that was mine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank You Note

Hey there, I do thank you for semi-protecting the last article that you have made. After the semi-protection, if there is more vandalism (7 days after the lifting of the semi-protected lock icon), I will take action. CHAK 001 (talk) 05:36, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. (You don't have to wait a week after the protection expires - you can re-list it at RFPP whenever it starts getting disruptive). AlexiusHoratius 06:23, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Motionless in White

Thank you for protecting the article from those pesky drama llamas. Motionless in White is an amazing band after all, but the real reason why I'm coming here is just to say you kind of tagged the reason for it being protected wrong. Not that it's a major deal, but it's just the edits that were disruptive weren't vandalism but more of being unsourced information saying stuff like "No! TJ left for [this reason]" (even the band themselves pasted a large entry explaining the whole situation, so yeah I'm actually saying the band actually vandalized their own article if you check the history). Anyway, that's all I wanted to say. -- GunMetal Angel 06:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

You're right - mostly that's a bit of a bad habit of mine (and laziness). The protection window gives a bunch of options when protecting a page, like vandalism and so on, but none really cover the "a lot of anons are making good faith but unsourced/undiscussed edits about once every 5 minutes or so" situations. (I'd have to type that into the reason window manually, instead of just clicking "vandalism".) But as you said I probably shouldn't do this... it's a bit like using rollback on a bad-but-not-vandalism edit. Easier, but still shouldn't be done. I'll try to be a bit wiser with my protection explanations from now on. AlexiusHoratius 06:30, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Harry Cook - Semi protection

Please reinstate the earlier edit removing wife, son and daughter details from the page as soon as possible. Please also reinstate the newspaper extract if possible. Watchdog2011 (talk) 14:38, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Get a consensus for the addition on the article's talk page first - and give a link or reference to where you found it. The information has to be verifiable. AlexiusHoratius 16:16, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks ...

... for semi-protecting Salem, Massachusetts. I was going to wait and see if the culprit returned one more time before requesting protection again. But it's just as well that it's done now. Happy editing! --sanfranman59 (talk) 22:39, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem - I had considered waiting a bit too, but it kept popping up on my watchlist and in the end "Don't post stuff word-for-word from another site" is a simple enough concept. AlexiusHoratius 22:49, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry accusation

You semi-protected Phoenix Park on the basis of "sock puppetry". However, I did not commit sock puppetry. Sockpuppetry is "the use of multiple accounts to deceive other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus, avoid sanctions, or otherwise violate community standards" I merely have a cycling IP, which does not make me a sock puppet. (talk) 22:50, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

You're avoiding a 3rr block by using multiple IP addresses to edit war on an article. I would consider this a violation of community standards. AlexiusHoratius 23:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

If you count all the IP edits as being from one user, you'd see that even then I didn't violate 3rr. Furthermore, I'm not using them to attempt to avoid breaking 3rr, I simply have a cycling IP address, which is neither my fault nor something I can change. I'm not in any way attempting to avoid a 3rr block, as I was never blocked for violating 3rr. I never pretended to be multiple people, nor tried to deceive anyone. I did not commit sockpuppetry. (talk) 01:36, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

An editor can still be blocked for edit warring even if the 3rr limit hasn't been technically breached - at a glance I saw at least ten edits, all involving the same thing over the past few weeks from the same IP range, and there may be more if I took the time to count. If you had had a static IP or were a registered editor, you would have been blocked awhile ago, possibly more than once. As it is, you're not blocked - and as far as I'm concerned you're basicallly free to do as you please, just not on that article. As I don't know how to do range blocks, the only other option would have been full protection, in which case the article's content wouldn't be any different than it is now. AlexiusHoratius 02:36, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
That doesn't change the fact that I don't appreciate being wrongly accused of sockpuppetry. (talk) 23:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Call it whatever you want - but you were still using multiple accounts to edit war on an article. Now no anonymous users can edit the article. AlexiusHoratius 00:44, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I wasn't using multiple accounts. I was using one at a time. I wasn't hopping back and forth to confuse people. When my IP changed, it changed. That's entirely out of my control. (talk) 21:32, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Editing DragonBall z kai

may i please edit the page nicktoons confirmed when the next episode is gonna air and i just wanna put whenPoky888 (talk) 13:46, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Please get a consensus on the talk page before making any additions. Also, you can use the {{editrequest}} on the talk page to ask that an edit be made to the article. (If you make another couple edits or so you should become autoconfirmed and will be able to edit semiprotected articles.) AlexiusHoratius 16:19, 4 June 2011 (UTC)


I have a beef with you! HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TO TEXAS? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:10, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I've been there. AlexiusHoratius 06:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your awesome contributions

Hi Alexius! I just wanted to take a moment to express my gratitude for your awesome awsomeness in clearing the backlog at RFPP a short while ago. This place would grind to a halt without the generosity of people like you who are willing to take up the necessary but unglamorous infrastructure work, like RFPP, that keeps things humming. I appreciate that very much. Thank you!  – OhioStandard (talk) 09:48, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Why thank you. (Although I fear I'm a bit less awesome than I previously claimed - I had forgotten to answer one of the requests...) AlexiusHoratius 14:45, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


Dear Sir,

we are forced to announce, that the following text (in bold) has been continuously, together with all references, erased from from the first paragraph of Wikipedia page of the Czech Republic:

"....the Czech Republic by official political name and Czechia (Česko in Czech) by geographic and short-form name, is a landlocked country in Central Europe", in edit mode usually ".....The Czech Republic (/ˈɛk/ (About this sound listen) CHEK;[1] Czech: Česká republika, pronounced [ˈtʃɛskaː ˈrɛpuˌblɪka] (About this sound listen)) by official political name and Czechia /ˈtʃɛki.ə/ [2] (Česko [ˈtʃɛskɔ] in Czech) by geographic and short-form name, is a landlocked country in Central Europe [3]"

It is the violation of the rules of Wikipedia encyclopedy, because mentioning of the text above is a regular preservation of important facts from statutory orders, official literature and press (see links below in references).

Czechia is the official English short-form and geographic name of the Czech Republic. This name is erroneously not widespread (mainly due to ignorance and confusion), but it is used in many official instances. The refusal to publish "Czechia" alongside "The Czech Republic," is a break of the decree of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic, which in 1993 recommended in its memorandum to all Czech embassies and diplomatic missions to use the full name "Czech Republic" only in official documents and titles of official institutions: "In all other cases, the one-word name Czechia should be preferred. Czechia is the official one-word name of the Czech Republic." One of the main articles about this issue, "Don't be affraid of Czechia, it needs your help" (see link below in references), written by Pavel Krejčí from Masaryk University in Brno, clarifies the main contours of the problem.

We officially protest against continous erasing of the one-word name of the Czech Republic, rejecting facts and ignoring the geographic name of the land by Wikipedia, despite the name being registered by United Nations, accepted by English speaking lands without any problems and everbody can find it among 2.400.000 links on internet. There is no reason to discuss it on Wikipedia, it has been already done many times with that mentioned ignorance of facts and vandalising deletions, therefore we appeal directly to the administrator of that page to protect that information when it will be added again.

On behalf of the civic initiative "Česko / Czechia"

PhDr. Libuše Čižmárová, CSc. - Brno, linguist and translator
Doc. PhDr. Jiří Felix, CSc. - Prague, linguist, associate professor of the Charles University in Prague
Dr. Vladimír Hirsch - Prague, composer, musician
PhDr. Eva Horová - Brno, linguist and translator
RNDr. Leoš Jeleček, CSc. - Prague, geographer, associate professor of the Charles University in Prague
PhDr. Pavel Krejčí, Ph.D. - Brno, linguist, Masaryk University Brno
Marianna Ostrovskaya - New York (U.S.A.), teacher of English language, Polyglot school Prague
Petr Schnur, M.A., - Hannover (Germany), historian, social psychologist
Jan Blanický - Prague, wikipedist User:Blanicky

References (bibliography):

ALLEN, J., SUTTON, C. (2011): A Student Atlas of World Politics, 9th Edition. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 240 p.,
KREJČÍ, P. (2008): Don’t be afraid of Czechia, it needs your help! Klaudyan, 5, č. 1, s. 30–37,
BIČÍK, R., PERLÍN R. (2001): Press statement on the importance of correct use of this country’s name in foreign languages
HOROVÁ, E., JELEČEK, L., KREJČÍ, P. (2008) "Where are you from?" – "I am from Czechia!" The Czech and Slovak History Newsletter: Bulletin of the Czechoslovak Studies Association, Vol. 31, No. 2, Fall 2008. Valdosta State University, Valdosta, GA, pp. 7–10.
MARSTON, S. et al. (2011): World Regions in Global Context: Peoples, Places, and Environments. 4th edition. Prentice Hall, Boston
KREJČÍ, P. (2009): Česko has still had its official english translation for 16 years; Vesmír, 88, March 2009, p. 200–202
JELEČEK, L. (2001): Codification of the names Česko / Czechia (1993)
MURPHY, A. B, JORDAN-BYCHKOV, T. G., BYCHKOVA-JORDAN B. (2008). The European culture area: a systematic geography. 5th ed., Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD, s. XV.
C.O.S.M.C. (2004): Information No.489/2003 Sb. (collection of laws) of the Czech Office for Surveying, Mapping and Cadastre about the releasing of The List of States . Confirmed Ratified December 18, 2003. Legal with efficiency since January 1, 2004 (4-21). Published in the „Collection of Laws“ of the Czech Republic, No.160/2003, p.8422.
JELEČEK L. (2004): Czechia. In: Encyclopedia of World Environmental History. Eds. S. Krech III, J. R. McNeill, C. Merchant, Vol. I. A–F, A Berkshire Reference Works, Routledge, New York &, London, pp. 279–280.
COLLECTIVE OF AUTHORS (1998): The statement of geographers, linguists, historians, and other experts in science and humanities on the problem of the official one-word geographical name for the Czech Republic.

Personal notice: The reason for sending this prostest to you is the fact you are mentioned on the page as admin, that made some protection there.Jan Blanický 13:14, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I really can't remember ever seeing the word "Czechia" used on an English language publication or map. I don't know why this is the case when "Slovakia" is used all the time, but that's how it is. As with Turin, Wikipedia uses the most common English spelling as determined by consenus with frankly little regard for what the "official" name is. ("Official" being what the local government wants people to use.) That's just my opinion, though, and I protected the article due to a very large number of changes without consensus - it didn't have anything to do with my opinion on the topic. The article's talk page would be the place to discuss this further and to try to arrive at a consensus with other editors. AlexiusHoratius 17:15, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

good day, sir

hi, could you please review my Wikipedia: Requests for adminship/Boberson33? (Boberson33 (talk) 04:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC))

Nothing personal, but I don't think you have enough experience yet. There isn't a technical minimum (other than having an account), but usually people like to see several thousand edits (many of which are substantial edits, not just vandalism reverts), maybe a bit of article creation and development, and evidence of a helpful and professional attitude when dealing with others. Being able to answer most questions about Wikipedia policy is another big factor. Like I said, don't take it personally, - adminship isn't all that fun anyway. If you still want to do it, just spend some more time editing here, get involved with stuff that interests you, take part in a Wikipedia-related discussion here or there, and after a few months you'll probably be ready. AlexiusHoratius 11:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
  1. ^ Oxford English Dictionary, second edition, Oxford University Press, 1989.
  2. ^ CZECHIA references: 1) UN: Names of States and their Territorial Parts (Český úřad zeměměřický a katastrální, 1993, p.8), 2) Allen, J., Sutton, C. (2011): A Student Atlas of World Geography, 9th Edition. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 240 p.; 3) Martson, S. et al. (2011): World Regions in Global Context: Peoples, Places, and Environments. 4th edition. Prentice Hall, Boston, 411 p.; 4) Murphy, A. B, Jordan-Bychkov, T. G., Bychkova-Jordan Bella (2008): The European culture area: a systematic geography. 5th ed., p.XV; 5) Číselník zemí ve Sb. zákonů 160/2003
  3. ^ "" (PDF). Retrieved 25 April 2010.