User talk:Edgar181/Archive4

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



Thanks for reverting those two edits to my user page. Acalamari 20:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Maleic anhydride.png

Hi Edgar, I've uploaded this image on commons and licensed it as "PD-self". I don't know if this licensing is correct: can you verify it, please? Thanks, --XXXL1986 15:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Attack page creation warning

Hi there, Is it a good idea to include the name of the person in the warning about the attack page at User talk:Faronandziska? (Since we do not wish to propogate the attack, and the original page itself will be deleted anyway). My warning was actually about the same page, BTW. Fourohfour 23:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand your concern, but in my opinion, it doesn't do any harm because the attack itself not visible - I only add the template after I delete the article. It may even be a good idea for the "victim" of the attack to be known. From a practical point of view, it helps avoid confusion about which article is being referred to. Also, the instructions on the category page Category:Attack_pages_for_speedy_deletion say to use the {{attack}} template, which is what I did. Let me know what you think. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I see, yeah. Fair point, although I don't know if it was intended for discretion to be used or not when including the article name. Fourohfour 23:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
You make an interesting point. The use of {{attack}} is fairly widespread. If you're interested in other people's opinions on its use (or wording) a good place to start a discussion about it would be Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

IP adress block reccomended

IP adresses and should be blocked from editing in Wikipedia permanently. These are from a middle school and are pouring vandalism into pages of Wikipedia. This will prevent future attacks and time wasted by having to fix the pages.

A student at this school, (a non-vandal) --Benjwgarner 21:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Both of those IP addresses are already in the middle of 1 or 2 month blocks that prevent anonymous editing. (Logged-in users are still free to edit.) We'll wait and see what happens when those blocks expire - Wikipedia policy is to block for ongoing vandalism and not for anticipated vandalism. But thanks for the heads-up - I'll keep those IPs on my watchlist and block promptly if the vandalism starts up again. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again!

Thanks for the AIV response! :P Kyaa the Catlord 00:44, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Patrick Higgins

Could you send me the content of my page entitled "Patrick Higgins"? It's my only copy. Thank you.

Since you don't have email enabled, I put it on your user page. You can just copy it and then blank the page if you don't want it there. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

Thanks. Even though it was pretty obvious, I didn't want to remove a sock notice from my own page. Appreciate the help. --Onorem 15:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. But I wouldn't worry about reverting anything like that on your own page. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


My point is, who is to say who is notable. The people I listed have had a profound effect on many lives, and they are alumni from AHS. There are countless National Merit students, students who have received community service awards, students who are making a name for themselves in arts and entertainment. Is it fair to list only those who achieved some status in a sporting event as notable? Either change the description "Notable" to "Alumni I feel should be named" or allow anyone of note to be added to the list. - Thededitor

IP block

Hi, sorry I'm not more clear on the whole dealing with vandalism procedure, but I noticed you previously blocked this ip and it has been blocked a number of times before then... yet vandalism continues. This may not be considered a very serious case, but I thought I'd mention it. The IP is If you have suggestions on correctly dealing with this sort of thing, I'd like to hear those as well. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 17:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

I hate to say it, but vandalism from that IP is not actually that bad. Nevertheless, I have applied a one month block to it. In the future, warn vandals (standard warnings can be found here: WP:TT) and then report them to WP:AIV if they persist. You can also read WP:VAND for a general overview of how Wikipedia tries to deal with vandalism. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Angela51194

Hey, there. I was watching recent changes in user talk for more of this guy, but happened to see you blocked this one -- I recently removed a report from AIV pertaining to this user, since they only had one visible edit, and needless to say, I didn't check their talk page at the time, and it's obvious I made a mistake with that. Good catch. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the one edit made me curious. Checking the user page made it obvious why the report was made to AIV. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


i was changing the I LIKE EGGGS on nitrogen because that was.... uncorrect should i say. GamedevilKZ (User: Gamedevil)

Sorry. My mistake. It looks like I mixed up your edits with those of the IP that was vandalizing. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Block reasons

Please use {{schoolblock}} as your blocking reason for school IPs, especially 1 & 6 month blocks, otherwise the unblock-en-l mailing list gets flooded with irate or confused emails from school staff and innocent students. I'd appreciate it if you would go back and update the reasons on your most recent blocks. Thanks. --  Netsnipe   ►  17:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

OK. I've been adding the template to the talk page, but not in the text of the reason for the block. I've gone back to my recent month+ blocks and added the template as the blocking reason - and will continue to do so from now on. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have noticed that you have recently unblocked and reblocked for longer a couple of school IPs that I blocked for ~1 month. Do you think I'm being too lenient, is there a specific reason you are doing this? Not that I really object, just curious mostly. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, those blocks that I've redone are where you have missed identifying as schools in the first place. You really need to perform WHOIS and Reverse DNS lookups and then do a quick Google search on the hostnames and results returned. e.g. Illinois Century Network IPs. Actually, I've come under fire from some other admins for being too harsh on school IPs with long blocks, so its really up to you whether you want to block longer or continue assuming good faith and playing whack a mole with vandals every few days or a month later. The main thing I'm correcting is that you need to use {{schoolblock}} as your block reason first and foremost. --  Netsnipe  ►  18:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
For IPs with a history of many blocks, I always check the WHOIS and tag the talk page with sharedIPEDU, etc. if it isn't there already. But in cases like these here, the minor vandals, when there has been only one prior block, it doesn't seem worth the effort. It's just my opinion that it's better to use the time elsewhere. Thanks for the explanation. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Film cat vandalism

Hello, I noticed you helped out at Category:Croatian language films and Category:Serbian language films. Could you give User:SISLEY a warning? On two separate occassions he has used "self-delete" tags for categories I have started. Apparently, he's a new user, so he probably doesn't know how dispute-resolution works (or verfiability, for that matter) but he still shouldn't be using dirty tactics to get a speedy delete enforced. Thanks. --Thewanderer 12:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, done. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


Those categories are in Serbo-Croatian-language films, the person who created those categories forgot a dash —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SISLEY (talkcontribs) 14:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

I'm not taking any sides on whether it should be deleted or not. But speedy deletion of a disputed category is not appropriate. Please take it to WP:CFD. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
THE CATEGORY IS ALREADY CREATED —Preceding unsigned comment added by SISLEY (talkcontribs)
That doesn't matter. Please discuss it at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_13#Category:Croatian_language_films. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

merck mission

the problem is that wihtout the qualifier, it is advertising for merck, which, i think, is not the job of an encyclpedia. what is your view ?Cinnamon colbert 00:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you that it needs the qualifier, but it is already right there in the first part of the first sentence. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

DYK question

According to Rigadoun, bergamottin is just shy of the 1500 characters required for featuring in the DYK section of the main page. Could you fix that. It sounds really interesting and it would be a shame if this one wasn't featured. Don't forget to leave a note in the relevant section of T:TDYK if you decide to update the article. - Mgm|(talk)

OK, done. I think it's a bit silly that an interesting article wouldn't be featured because it was 1470 characters instead of 1500, but I went ahead and added a little to it to put it over the top. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Concerning:Category:Serbian language films

I've undeleted the cat; someone should probably bring this up at CfD, as you said. Cheers. Lectonar 16:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. It's on CFD now: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_13#Category:Croatian_language_films. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:50, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Ode to the helpful admin

I spend a lot of time patrolling Recent Changes,
Looking for destruction that's been wrought on our pages,
There are more silly people than I could possibly handle,
So thank you blocking this annoying vandal. --Dweller 16:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

That's great! Thanks. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:50, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
And this one too. User:Bedmod4anded. Cheers again. --Dweller 14:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Concerning:Category:Serbian language films

A last warning for what? You guys have invented new languages and you didn't pay attention to the rest of the categories of films by language, as I repeated several times, I didn't create the categories, if you have problems with them, you should complain to the people who created the categories of films by language.—Preceding unsigned comment added by SISLEY (talkcontribs)


Updated DYK query On 18 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bergamottin, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 10:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Chemical structures

Hi Edgar18,

I have seen that you are contributing many exceptionally good chemical structures. If it is possible, could you please upload all of them to the Commons at high resolution (like the recent numbered ones). That way all Wikipedia languages could use them. Cacycle 00:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I've been meaning to upload many of them for awhile, but haven't gotten around to it yet. I'll start with the numbered heterocycles. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Ed, I just wanted to say thanks (again) for drawing chemical images for the pages that I tagged recently! -- Quantockgoblin 16:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for the quick attention to the user vandalising my page. Keep making Wikipedia great :) --YbborT 01:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 01:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


Can you explain your block of user:Sammycon, please? I'm not doubting you, I just want more details. DS 21:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC) (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) was blocked for repeated vandalism of Sean Hannity despite repeated warnings. Then Sammycon (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) immediately showed up and made the same edits, received several more warnings, but continued the vandalism, so I blocked him. A simple case of vandalism. I'm surprised that another admin unblocked him without even consulting me. But I'm not surprised that he then had to be quickly reblocked within minutes for continuing to abuse edit priviledges. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


I completely missed that the article tert-Butylhydroquinone had been blanked. Thanks for catching that and for your cleanup work. Adm58 19:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I got suspicious when I noticed that it didn't have any categories. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


This user you recently blocked, [1] I think he has created a sock here, [2] thanks. Artaxiad 21:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

That account is now blocked for vandalism. Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 22:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Isothiazole.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Isothiazole.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BigrTex 19:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Article clearence

Hi Edgar181 i just wanted you to give a go or nogo on this article Fanny Smaking

Is where groupe of people assault citizens in the street. It is done with no weapons just kicking and punching till the victim is severly injuerd and imobilized.Then the group leaves.

Source: seen on csi lost vegas. pls tell me what you think.Redknight26

Personally, if I saw an article such as this, I would recommend merging it into something like assault. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)



Your image resides on commons place now under the name of will be deleted from here..--Alnokta 20:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


Would you mind clearing? --Auto(talk / contribs) 12:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Steviol glycoside

Hi. I wrote most of the steviol glycoside article. I'm gratified that you consider it "not a stub" and removed the stub tag. However the article still needs to incorporate information from similar wiki articles in other languages (particularly the Italian Wikipedia, which has different references I've wanted to look up), and information about extraction or synthesis. I was never really clear on where one draws the line between stub and non-stub, though... -Amatulic 18:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Just from my general experience looking at chemistry articles on Wikipedia, it seems that anything with an infobox, reliable sources, and at least a paragraph or two of text isn't considered a stub. To me, a chemical article is only a stub if it doesn't describe minimally what the chemical is and minimally what it's significance is. Steviol glycoside is well beyond that. It's a nice article - thanks for writing it. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Your chemical structures gallery!

Thank you for uploading that massive gallery of these chemicals! again, thanks! is so big that my turtle hangs when it tries to load it :).--The Joke 21:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Unblock request

USER TALK: Trevshaff123

hey, you guys blocked my IP school adress sorry bout my friends doing that if u could please unblcok us that would be nice -Thanks- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevshaff123 (talkcontribs)

You realize that if you want me to do something, you have to tell me what IP address you are referring to, right? --Ed (Edgar181) 15:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Yea I do sorry well its fine now but thanks for being smart with me dude.

Another question ed, do you own Wikipedia..? or do have no life and thinks its funny to block IP adress's? Get back to me Or will You just block me... haha you prob will


Hi there,

Diquat is not a derivative of 4,4-Dipyridine. See I have moved this to Bipyridine anyway as it fits in better there, comparsion with paraquat. This page is more a coordination, fine chemistry page


Socksysquirrel 23:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

You're right, sorry. I got diquat and paraquat mixed up. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

'Stub of the Day'

You may have seen, a prototype of the 'Stub of the Day' is up and running:

(commented out)

-- Quantockgoblin

Thanks. I put it on my user page. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Dawood Hercules Chemicals Limited

You deleted an earlier version of Dawood Hercules Chemicals Limited as an advertisement. I suspect that it was a copyvio as well. I rewrote the article, which I think now sufficiently establishes notability, and which doesn't read like an advertisement. --Eastmain 13:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

It looks like it was deleted twice under G11. I like the way it is now - with a neutral tone and notability well established by the references. Thanks for taking care of it. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


Just to let you know that User:Parkerfutbol3 still doesn't understand that he vandalized pages when he shouldn't. He even requested unblock in all caps (without Wiki formatting). This user even doesn't admit that he vandalized pages on Wikipedia. Amos Han Talk 20:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

He's just trolling, it seems. --Ed (Edgar181) 21:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
It could be true. Amos Han Talk 21:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


Hi there Edgar. I noticed you've worked on 10-Propargyl-10-deazaaminopterin before, and was wondering whether you could move it to Pralatrexate, which is the International Nonproprietary Name. I'd do it myself, but there's a redirect in place. By the way, if you think this is an unnecessary "violation" of WP:RM, just let me know and I'll ask over there. Thanks, Fvasconcellos 21:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. In my opinion, this is the best way to handle a non-controversial move such as this, rather than WP:RM. By the way, if you're ever interested in becoming an admin so that you can do this kind of thing yourself, just let me know and I'd be happy to nominate you. You're just the kind of person that should have the extra admin abilities. --Ed (Edgar181) 21:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help, and for the kind words :) I think I'll take a rain check for now—I must admit I've felt a need for the admin tools more than once, but they'd probably get in the way of my general editing; I'd soon get addicted to the extra buttons! Thanks again, Fvasconcellos 00:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Konstantin Burshteyn

It's back.... Neil916 (Talk) 19:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

It's gone again and the creator blocked. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Block Reason

Hey Ed, My sister, Littlemissmuffit, was blocked from editing and she wont tell Me why. If you could tell me that would be great. Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mentalinside (talkcontribs) 04:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC).

The reason should be fairly clear by all the warning messages on Littlemissmuffit's talk page. You can also look at the block log. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Terry Sheffield

Dear Edgar, Thanks for deleting the Terry Sheffield page, just after I put the speedy deletion tag. I posted a message suggesting the reasons to the person who created it, and hoping he would contribute constructively. Best wishes, --Cyril Thomas 17:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Ruthenium (II) tris (bathophenantroline disulfonate)

Hi, at 2007-03-17T17:47:23 you tagged Ruthenium (II) tris (bathophenantroline disulfonate) with {{advertisement}}. Could you explain your opinion on the article's talk page? Thank you. Rjgodoy 03:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I replied at the article. --Ed (Edgar181) 10:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

User Bluefield

Thanks for you help with this user. I'm wondering why you modified the expiration for such a blatent attack across several articles? Since this users edits were largely negative in nature, I suspect that they may have been banned under an anonymous IP before. Can you check this? I'm of the opinion that these actions justify the infinite block that was first applied. Please reconsider. --STS01 20:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I understand your concern. I don't think the "vandalism only account" reason I had for the indef ban was accurate (but the recent edits certainly were abusive). Maybe I'm being too generous in reducing the ban, but I will keep a close eye on Bluefield and any further misbehavior will lead to an indef block. Please don't hesitate to let me know if it happens. If I can find evidence of prior similar behavior, I'll reblock longer too. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I think if you will research the situation with Colin Cowherd, and The Herd with Colin Cowherd, you will see that it was user STS01 who is abusing Wikipedia, not user Bluefield. User STS01 seems to think he owns these 2 articles and removes any material he does not agrre with. He is the one who should be banned ~ a concerned 3rd party

Hello Ed....just to be clear, I have never been banned before under any former name or IP at anytime in the past. Neither have I edited anything without utilizing my "Bluefield" signature. I appreciate the lifted block/ban, and have no intention at all of vandalizing any further articles. I made my hamhanded point, and I believe the other editor and I have come to terms. Have a good one. --Bluefield 00:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

User Blocking

Hey mate i would like to ask you to block user:Ieatwallpaper1 from wikipedia for a short period of time, i believe his comments and creation of the article Peter huerta are just misuse of wikipedia, cheers and kind regards CheetahKeeper 14:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Generally, I will give at least one warning before blocking. Sometimes a user will make inappropriate edits, get warned, and then contribute postively. I'll keep a watch out, and if he misbehaves after the warning I gave him not long ago, I'll block. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
That didn't take long. He's blocked. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Cheers for that mate, I hate when people use Wikipedia as a bully tool. Cheers and Keep up the great work mate.CheetahKeeper 14:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


Hi Ed. Can you please move this structure to commons in order to be used in the nl: and de: Wikipedia? Thanks, Niels —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 14:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

Done. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


Do you know something I dont? The user only has 2 edits; seems a little premature to block him indefinitely (or block him at all, I'd say). Kafziel Talk 16:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

For new users whose only edits are blatant vandalism and who have been warned, I typically block immediately. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Okie dokie. Kafziel Talk 16:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
If you'd like to give him a second chance, I won't object if you want to reduce the block. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Nope, I don't mind. Just wondering if he was a sockpuppet or something. Kafziel Talk 17:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Probably premature

Did you see how many articles linked to List of Masonic temples? I just typed masonic temple into the search and came up with an empty page. It might be best to restore that article and afd it. --evrik (talk) 15:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The list was included in the navigation template {{Freemasonry}}, which explains the large number of links. Femto 15:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. I deleted it because of consensus on the talk page and lack of objection to the prod for 7 days. But since there is now an objection, I have restored it. I'll leave it to the others involved on the talk page to take it to AFD. --Ed (Edgar181) 16:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Chemical structures

Hi Ed. I do not understand, why you upload most of the structures you draw to the en-WP and not to the Commons. It's a great job you do, but if all structures were on Commons, all Wikipedia could benefit and use them. --Leyo 18:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I have had repeated problems logging in and editing at Commons due to blocking/autoblocking of the shared IP address I often use. It's simply too frustrating for me to deal with. I have never hesitated to move images there when requested (when I am not prevented from uploading). It's been awhile since I have been prevented from editing there, so maybe I should try more often now. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I can understand that being blocked is very annoying for you. In the de-WP we are currently emptying this category (moving structures to Commons, replacing them with structures from the Commons and deleting them). Most of the structures (including ugly .gif and .jpg) have already been eliminated, but I am still looking around for structures on Commons and other Wikipedias. There are just two of your structures left that could replace the old ones on de-WP: Triaminotrinitrobenzene.png (for StructCAS3058386.png) and Caspofungin.png (for Caspofungin.png). Your version of caspofungin looks quite different to the other structure. As you do research on drug discovery, your version is probably more appropriate up-to-date with new findings. Do you think it should replace the other version then? --Leyo 22:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
The two versions of caspofungin are visually quite different, but chemically the same. Mine is higher resolution, but the other is a quite bit easier to understand because of the more regular "bond angles". Either is fine - I'll leave it up to you to pick which you prefer. If there are any specific images you would like me to move over to Commons, please just ask. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I know that both versions of caspofungin are chemically equivalent. Is there a special reason for this special conformation "around a cercle"? --Leyo 11:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
It's just a style that is commonly used for cyclic polypeptides because the amino acid side chains and stereochemistry are easier to keep track of this way. The disadvantage is that it produces an unnatural appearance in terms of the large circle. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer. I think your structure of caspofungin should at least be used additional to the other in the de-WP. Can you move that as well as Triaminotrinitrobenzene.png to the Commons please? Thanks. --Leyo 23:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
OK, done: here and here --Ed (Edgar181) 00:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. They are both used in the German all language articles now. --Leyo 11:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


According to the deletion log you deleted the article DIKW. Where can I found the discussion related to the AfD process? Thanks in advance for your help. --ThT 03:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This article went through the proposed deletion process rather than AFD. It was nominated for deletion on Apr 10 by Overix (talk · contribs) with the following reason: "DIKW" is a student's proposal of informal idea in the Category:Futurology, and there are no sufficient sources on this, for ex. Jonathan Hey's only recent Proceedings papers. About on Wisdom by Douglas Reay: " owners have little or no control over information placed on their server" . Under the proposed deletion process, if no one objects to deletion after five days, the article can be deleted. I deleted it after 7 days, but under this process they are automatically restored if anyone objects. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. For some reason the nomination for deletion don't show up on my watchlist. Do you know why? However, I don't think the reason for deletion is not correct. I could add more references to the article to proof that. Also GOOGLE has more than 23.000 results, which is not bad for a quite abstract model in information science. --ThT 17:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
OK, I have restored the article. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Michael Goudeau

Could you undelete Michael Goudeau. He clearly passes the test of a creative professional. [3] He was a CBS radio show host and is currently a writer for a TV show and nominated for several Emmy awards.

OK, it's restored. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Mega thanks!

Delete image please


I managed to upload the wrong image - can you please delete:

800px-Trost ligand.png e.g.

-- thanks Quantockgoblin 21:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, done. --Ed (Edgar181) 21:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! -- Quantockgoblin 21:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

why did you take my free toast page down? Reevesgla1919 16:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Ongoing vandalism by Alvord Unified School District, Riverside, California

You apparently temporarily blocked this school district's IP address on January 10, 2007, and since then there has been more vandalism from this school district. For example this week Resveratrol was twice replaced. It seems clear the school administrators involved could care less that Wikipedia is repeatedly vandalized from their IP address. Chrisbak 00:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I have now blocked anonymous editing from that IP for 6 months. Thanks for letting me know. --Ed (Edgar181) 00:29, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Nintendo NSider Forums moves to DRV

[An editor has asked for a deletion review of Nintendo NSider Forums. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.]

It's the official forums of Nintendo of America. That right there is enough to justify notability. I've already run it to DRV, and it's a new nom right now. TRKtv (daaaaah!) 02:01, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I commented at the deletion review. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Some formatting questions

Hi. I have some question, that I've come up with during some edits.

  1. Should I add InChI identifiers to the chemboxes? They are in a lot of cases too long.
  2. Similar as above with adding SMILES to drugbox.
  3. Is better to begin each field in chembox with capital or small letter?
  4. Do you know, what is the difference between c.c. and o.c. at flash point temperature and what does it mean?
  5. Is it a worth of adding ~~~~ as a comment to uploaded images?
  6. Is a good idea to replace chembox with chembox-new (only if I add new data)?

Thanks. Tomaxer 12:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

You can add InChi and SMILES if you like, but as they are not terribly useful at the moment, I don't think it's all that important. Someday Wikipedia may have search features that will make use of them, and then they could be really usefull. But we're not there now. But, as you say, they can be detrimental in cases where they are really long.
I like to begin fields with a capital and that seems to be what most people do. But just be consistent within an article.
CC and OC refer to "closed cup" and "open cup". These are just two different analytical methods for determining flash point. If your source specifies which was used, you should report it.
I don't think it's really necessary to add ~~~~ to uploads.
The chemistry wikiprojects have been making a transition to the new chemboxes, but I don't think there is a real consensus on whether there should be a complete change over. I have been using {{chembox new}} when I add it to articles, but I have been sticking the old version when it's already there. There are also a few really old chembox styles out there too - those should be replaced because they don't look the same.
Feel free to bring up any additional questions like these at the chemistry wikiprojects, too. We're a friendly bunch.
--Ed (Edgar181) 20:06, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Tomaxer 11:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
And is here Acenaphthoquinone such old chembox? Tomaxer 13:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Yep. It's best to "modernize" ones like that. There are aslo some with blue shading out there too. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:09, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

PSP page move

I noticed you deleted PlayStation Pee. Thank you. Could you fix the PlayStation Portable/PlayStation Pe issue, too? The talk page needs to be moved back, as well. Dancter 17:45, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, should be fixed now. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I very much appreciate it. Dancter 17:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


The speedy deletion tag was on because there was no proof of the thing in question existing. I wasn't aware at the time that there was an article about the item in question, but I must ask, isn't creating an article about an item that there already is an article for considered vandalism, I like to know because I pretty sure it is but correct me if I am wrong, otherwise I will warn the user about this. Xtreme racer 20:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Considering that creation of the article was this user's first edit, I think it is best to assume that he simply didn't realize that an article on the topic already existed. Edits should only be considered vandalism when there is the intention to disrupt Wikipedia in some way. This was almost certainly an honest mistake on his part. Also, in general it is best to tag articles such as this with {{unreferenced}}, rather than {{db-g1}} which is for articles that are clear nonsense. In any case, keep up the good work fighting vandalism and tagging new pages! --Ed (Edgar181) 20:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I hereby award you the RickK anti-vandalism barnstar!

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I award you this Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your prolific work to prevent vandalism to the Anabolic steroid page. Your eye for vandalism is uncanny as is your ability to quickly revert it. Congratulations. Wikidudeman (talk) 04:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! That's very kind of you. --Ed (Edgar181) 10:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm relatively new as an editor, but quickly found Edgar181 was serious about anonymous IP vandalism. However as anonymous IP vandalism evolves into inserting very legitimate looking - but bogus - information into quite technical articles, how are anti-vandalism tools going to evolve as well? For example I wonder about a system where anonymous IP addresses with a history of vandalism can be restricted by administrators to certain Categories or whatever, in order to try to keep them from undermining the more technical articles? Right now one anonymous IP address vandal I watch is sophisticated enough to confuse most administrators, and that is likely to become an increasing problem. Perhaps RickKK was right after all? Chrisbak 16:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Anabolic steroid featured article candidate. Please support.

I have nominated the Anabolic steroid article to be a featured article. Please vote in support of it being a featured article here Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anabolic steroid/archive3. Contributors have been working vastly to improve this article since then taking into account criticism of it and improving it on all accounts since it's last nomination and it has gone a long ways since then. Please vote in support of it. Thanks.Wikidudeman (talk) 12:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Looking at it briefly, I see a few minor changes I would like to make to it first. I'll try give it a more thorough look a bit later. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Anabolic steroid copyedit request

I added a new section to the Anabolic steroid article. Can you look it over for grammar mistakes for me? Fix anything you see? The new section is called "Legal and sport restrictions". Thanks.Wikidudeman (talk) 19:20, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I award you The Copyeditor's Barnstar

CopyeditorStar7.PNG The Copyeditor's Barnstar
I award you The Copyeditor's Barnstar for your scrupulous work in helping to improve the grammar and wording of the Anabolic steroid article. Wikidudeman (talk) 23:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again. I did a bit more copyediting of the new section. The article has really come a long way. Great job. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)


Accidentaly reverting your user page to the vandalized page in attempt to revert the vandalism was a mistake, I assure you. I fixed it again. :P. Sorry to Antandarus as well.vLaDsINgEr 01:46, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem. --Ed (Edgar181) 11:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Help please

Need admin help, since I don't know if Star Wars episode 8 should be a page, or should it be deleted. Thank you in advance. Whstchy 15:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

As it stands, I think it fails Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion because of its speculative nature and its lack of reliable sources. It may even be a copyright violation. But I would recommend bringing it up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Wars to see if those folks think there is anything worth keeping or merging into another article (or if something on the topic already exists). Hope this helps. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Star Wars Episode 7, too. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:31, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, will drop them a line over there. Whstchy 15:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Decane.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Decane.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Joelholdsworth 10:50, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Some formatting questions 2

Hi, I again have some questions.

  1. Should I add organic haloderivatives to its halogen compound category (e.g. bromoform to the category bromine compounds)?
  2. What should I do, when I find two values (for example density), which significantly differ from each other?
  3. Do you know some good free program for creating structure drawings? I currently use ACD/ChemSketch Freeware and I used for a moment BKChem.
  4. What is the best license for images, if I do not request any rights?
  5. Should I place space in text like == See also == (==See also==) or * [[some link]] (*[[some link]])?

Thanks. Tomaxer 17:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

    1. Organic haloderivatives should be added to Category:Organohalides or one of its specific daughter categories.
    2. If you think one source is more reliable than another, I would go with that one. Often a catalog will report the density of its product, which may be <100% pure, rather than the density of pure compound. If one source specifies conditions, such as temperature, I would go with that one.
    3. I don't know of any other than ChemSketch. Sorry.
    4. {{PD-self}} is the best license for chemical structure images - it releases them to the public domain.
    5. In both cases I don't think it matters, giving identical output either way. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Tomaxer 18:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ode to the helpful admin

:I spend a lot of time patrolling Recent Changes,
 :Looking for destruction that's been wrought on our pages,
 :There are more silly people than I could possibly handle,
 :So thank you blocking this annoying vandal. --Dweller 14:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome.  :) --Ed (Edgar181) 14:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Flavin adenin dinucleotide.gif

Hi Ed. I think, this structure is quite ugly. Some bonds are not straight (e.g. in the ring at the bottom) and angles are incorrect (one keto group at the top left hand side). Are you able to fix that? Thanks. -- 16:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've added new images to FAD and FADH2. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:02, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:1-Heptanol.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:1-Heptanol.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Selket Talk 22:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi there

Re. this block just now, note that the anon editor had not been warned in almost 2 weeks and that this edit today was their first. I final-warned them after their edit but you blocked anyway. They were reported to ANI in the strongest terms but had never been warned. Just sayin' ... ;) - Alison 19:00, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, the {{repeatvandal}} tag at the top of the IP's talk page does warn of "an immediate block without further warning". It's my opinion that our warnings shouldn't be empty - and I acted accordingly. Even apart from that, the anonymous editor made offensive comments directed at an ethnic minority. I have always blocked immediately for that type of thing - even the basest of individuals already know that they are doing something wrong when they do that. I don't think Wikipedia should have any tolerance for such editing. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
"Even apart from that, the anonymous editor made offensive comments directed at an ethnic minority" - did they? Ah - well then they can just sit out their block. Agreed, so. Thanks for the reply. - Alison 19:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC) (needs to keep her AGF in check sometimes)


Something went wrong with that article. Can you fix that? Thanks. --Leyo 09:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I fixed the chembox. Thanks for pointing out the problem. --Ed (Edgar181) 10:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you...

Thank you for the quick revert of the vandalism to my talk page. I do appreciate it.

--JFreeman (talk) 15:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 01:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Poopdeckpappy

Thank you for the block on this user. I had been tangling with him all evening, and was hoping for reinforcements. I hate attack pages, and someone who continuously recreates attack pages is useless. At any rate, thanks. Let me know if I can ever be of assistance to you. ---Charles 01:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 01:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Well soluble

Hi there,

I do not like this terminology. Maybe 'very soluble' would be more in line with journal and encyclopedia usage.


Socksysquirrel 23:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

You're right, "very soluble" would be less ambiguous to most people. --Ed (Edgar181) 01:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Wrong dash used in watchlist

Hi Ed. I don't know where to place this, but you certainly know:
In the watchlist, the changes in size of articles are shown. At the moment, it looks like this (-50), but (−50) would be correct according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dashes)#Dashes and hyphens used on Wikipedia. It's certainly not a big deal, but I think that if the correct character has to be used in articles, it should also be compulsory for the watchlist. Don't you think so? --Leyo 16:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

That seems like an appropriate change to make. I'm not sure where the best place to suggest it would be, but I'd guess Wikipedia:Village pump. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I put the comment here. --Leyo 19:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Tetraiodomethane, Image license, some questions

Hi, could you fix interwikilinks in artice tetraiodomethane? They are linked to template chembox and I don't want to accidentally mess it up if it will somehow affect Template:Chembox. For future, is it enough only to replace those links? And isn't there some change in licenses, when uploading images? I failed to set public domain license to my last uploaded image Image:HomocapsaicinII.png. Now I manually repaired it. Finally I have a few questions again.

  1. Should I create new category halomethanes?
  2. What about adding halomethanes to categories? Add e.g. bromochloromethane to organobromides and organochlorides, or its better to put it only in organohalides (most of the time used)?
  3. To keep some uniformity, use kPa or hPa better for vapour pressure?
  4. Is there some prefered MSDS to use? Tomaxer 11:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, there are no other languages that have an article for CI4, so I just deleted the incorrect interwiki links. In the future, feel free to remove or correct them as you see fit.
Just manually adding the proper license for an image of yours that didn't have one when uploaded is just fine. It looks like you handled it correctly.
Creating a new category for halomethanes sounds like a good idea - I would put it in Category:Organohalides.
I don't believe that we have a preferred unit of measure for vapor pressure - maybe just leave it in the same units as your reference source.
There is no preferred MSDS source - some are more complete than others and I usually choose one that has the most data. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:15, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, so I'll do that halomethane category.Tomaxer 15:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

User: Black people lol

Hey Edgar181 Thanks for the block on User: Black people lol. What do you thing of this user’s name? I’m not sure how to take it. And if I’m not sure, I know there has to be other people who think the same thing. What is the best way to handle this situation/? Thanks for your help. Shoessss 13:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

That issue is moot as this point - I blocked the user indefinitely for his vandalism. But if he hadn't been blocked for vandalism, he would surely have been blocked and asked to choose another username. Inappropriate usernames can be reported here: Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Once again thatks for your help and the link. Have a great day.Shoessss 14:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom murder

Hey (Edgar181), I’m sorry to drag you into this one, but can you mediate a situation that is going on at Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom murder. Appreciate your input on the situation. I’ll let you read the discussion page and decide the method of resolving the disagreement.Shoessss 22:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

(Edgar181) thanks for your input....Back to the trenches.Shoessss 00:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
You might consider a checkuser request as well. Unless I'm mistaken, my warning to Simplemines was followed by a reply from Chesspieceface as if the message was to him.... not to mention the stated intention to create multiple accounts. --Ed (Edgar181) 01:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Ed! Sorry to say, I am going to claim ignorance here! How do I request the check? Just let me know and I will be more than happy to start the process.. Once again, Thanks for your help.Shoessss 01:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
The page is at WP:RFCU with instructions there. I'm not all that familiar with the process, so I'm not sure that there is enough "evidence" for them to act on. I'm not sure it's worth the effort either. --Ed (Edgar181) 01:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
If you reread your own comments on that page, Edgar, you'll see I replied to a message directed to BOTH me and him. Go ahead and do your checkuser, but you'll definitely see we're different people; I have no need to hide my communications. Chesspieceface 02:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Anti-Vandalism barnstar

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your great work in fighting vandalism and blocking users who are reponsible for that vandalism. Keep up the good work! Lradrama 12:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! --Ed (Edgar181) 13:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom murder, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.Shoessss talk

I'll agree, but don't think I have much to contribute at this point. --Ed (Edgar181) 17:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Lauren deufel

I see you deleted the Lauren deufel page. I just wanted to let you know to keep an eye out for the creater of the page, User:Excheer1eader, which seems to be a vandalism only account. Just wanted to warn you. Karrmann 00:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep an eye on him. He seems to have stopped since you warned him, though. --Ed (Edgar181) 01:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

Info-icon.svg A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom murder.
For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz]
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
This message delivered: 08:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC).

1,000 Thanks

...for the prompt indef block of User:Wendyow. Some things should simply not be tolerated...ever. Doc Tropics 23:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Any time. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
The editor that you indef-blocked yesterday is now editing from an IP: User: and a brief review of its contrib history will confirm its the same editor (the IP picked up exactly where the blocked editor left off). Unfortunately, the IP seems to originate from a university in Georgia (USA), so blocking the IP may not be viable (I lack technical expertise and am uncertain of this). What, if anything, can be done to banish this vexing heckler? Thanks in advance for any help you can give! Doc Tropics 17:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner - I've been away from Wikipedia for a few days. It looks like another admin blocked that IP for a week. Just let me (or another admin) know if it continues again. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Please block IP

You said that the next violation whould result in the IP being blocked in's user talk. Please do so as i lack the ability to. They vandalised the law of conservation of mass, the vandalisation can be seen in the history of my edit.


There have been no edits from that IP since May 3, when it was blocked from editing for two months. The vandalism to conservation of mass was introduced more recently by an editor using the IP Thanks for removing it. But I'd like to suggest that instead of just removing the vandalism, you revert (see Help:Reverting) to an older, undamaged version of the article, so that content that may have been removed during the vandalism gets restored. Thanks for you contributions. --Ed (Edgar181) 10:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Deleting links

Hi Ed. Just wondering, about your edits to 2-Bromo-4,5-methylenedioxyamphetamine and to 4-Bromo-3,5-dimethoxyamphetamine, why did you delete the links at the start of each article? -Use the force (Talk * Contribs) 22:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia's Manual of Style, one should "avoid putting links in the boldfaced titles". It's not really a big deal to me, so I won't object if you want to put it back, but most likely someone else will come along to enforce Manual of Style rules. --Ed (Edgar181) 23:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Talk:13256278887989457651018865901401704640

Hello. Logs show: 21:20, 22 May 2007 Edgar181 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:13256278887989457651018865901401704640" (WP:CSD#G8)

But page Talk:13256278887989457651018865901401704640 does not satisfy CSD#G8 because it contained deletion discussion that was not logged elsewhere - "Talk pages whose corresponding article does not exist, unless: It contains deletion discussion that is not logged elsewhere;" Please undelete the talkpage so a democratic discussion can take place. Kirils 21:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem, it's undeleted now. I'd suggest that the discussion concerning redirects would be better at the talk page of the target article, though. --Ed (Edgar181) 21:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I truly appreciate your quick reply. :) --Kirils 22:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


Hey. Can you keep an eye on the Bodybuilding article? Someone keeps removing an image from the article which has been justified for being there. Their reasoning is baseless and personal and I don't want to break any 3rr rules. I justified it's existence on the talk page many times and it's the only copyright free viable and quality image that exists at present. Can you restore the image and revert their edits? Thanks.Wikidudeman (talk) 03:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll keep an eye on it. I don't understand the others' reasoning - the image should stay unless a more suitable replacement is offered. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

World War L

It never even occurred to me that would be the case, as in lower case. (Yeah, bad pun there.) To keep that from happening again, I'll make World War Lowercase L a redirect. The article was created by a vandal which I put a speedy tag on, then realized that it seemed to be a delete-and-recreate job. Strange. Thanks for the heads-up. Realkyhick 04:30, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

The redirect is a good idea. Thanks for your help. --Ed (Edgar181) 10:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Jaakko K. Kari

Jaakko K. Kari why did you delate this topic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Jaakko K. Kari was marked for speedy deletion by Greenrd (talk · contribs) for being a biography that doesn't assert the notability of the subject (see WP:CSD#A7). I agreed and deleted it. If you feel the subject meets the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia outlined at WP:BIO, you can create the article again, but this time include the information that demonstrates notability. --Ed (Edgar181) 10:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


You blocked Davidson County Schools in North Carolina. I just wanted to apologize for anything done by my peers, aquaintences, or other idiots that I don't know. We're not all vandals. I go there. But don't even consider unblocking us. 1 bad apple really does spoil the bunch. Mattbash 00:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of: List_of_Rugby_league_incidents

This article was deleted without adequate explanation. It was one of the most referenced articles in Wikipedia. Previous administrators had requested that the incidents be referenced, an accomplishment that took many weeks to achieve. All the incidents were painstakingly referenced with news articles from major Australian newspapers who have been covering these incidents.

I ask that the deletion be reconsidered, and the article restored. It is not right that the Wikipedia's coverage of rugby league only include unreferenced fan info duplicated from the rugby clubs' fan sites. It is not right that negative info be deleted. The list was widely cited by other wiki articles, and by many external websites. It cannot be called "non-notable", as the news coverage of these events has been massive within Australia.

As it's stands, Wiki's Rugby coverage is just a fan site, identical to what can be found elsewhere. 18:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

The article List_of_Rugby_league_incidents was proposed for deletion by Risker (talk · contribs) on May 10 with the reasoning "Unencyclopedic mishmash of non-notable gossip, incorporating personal actions by players in multiple unrelated leagues. If it is important enough to be noteworthy, these incidents should be in the articles of either the players involved or the teams/leagues involved." If there are no objections to deletion after five days, the articles are deleted. I deleted it on May 16. With the objection you've raised, I have now restored the article. However, I think Risker has valid concerns, and these should probably be addressed, or the article may end up being deleted again (perhaps more permanently). Happy editing. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for letting me know of the undeletion. I will likely take this to a full AfD, but it will take me a few days to get the time to do it right. It's a real pleasure to bump into one of the (vast majority of) administrators around here who just quietly does the work and treats editors on all sides of a question with dignity and respect. Risker 21:05, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind words. --Ed (Edgar181) 10:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

curious about length of block

hi - wondering why you blocked for only 48hrs, when the acocunt seems to be all-vandalism with many warnings, and the edits today were 5 vandalizing edits having just come off of a 24 hr block - I mean, hope springs eternal, but I was just curious about why you didn't go for a longer block. By the way, I agree completely with your logic above regarding abusive or racist vandalism meriting immediate blocking because they know exactly what they're doing. Anyway - I'm just wondering about your reasons for this one. Thanks Tvoz |talk 20:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Sadly, as far as vandalism from IP addresses goes, this one is relatively mild. Generally, longer blocks are reserved for IP addresses that have been repeatedly blocked before - my progression generally goes 24h --> 48h --> 1 week --> 1 month --> six months. Since this was only the second block, I blocked for 48 hours, which is fairly standard. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:27, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I can see the logic - this guy doesn't seem to have gotten much of a lesson from the 24hr, but who knows. I've seen a lot worse too - this one was more irritating than anything. Thanks for the reply! Tvoz |talk 20:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Recommend block for

User: is continuing to vandalize pages. One that caught my attention was Roswell UFO incident. I recommend blocking this user and advising the owner of the IP address of the vandalism. I have reverted the damage to the Roswell article. Thanks! Chrisbrl88 13:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

It looks like Lucasbfr (talk · contribs) has just recently blocked that IP. --Ed (Edgar181) 14:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


Dear Edgar181, Regarding the images, Image:Adanabodies.JPG and Image:Adanamass.PNG that you removed delete tags. I am in confusion with rules,Where I did mistake with tags. In the image pages, source is given.When I follow these source link shows that this is a movie, and copyrighted.But uploader(a banned user) stated that there is no any copyright with these images. Isn't there a mistake there? Your reply will be helpful for me. Thanks in advance. Regards.Must.T C 16:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

You tagged the images with {{Db-nonsense}}, which doesn't apply - and I didn't catch the potential copyright issue. You can read about how to deal with possible copyright infringements at Wikipedia:Copyrights or WP:CSD (see criteria G12 for those that are unquestionably copyright violations, or G5 for contributions from banned users.) --Ed (Edgar181) 16:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your guidance.Regards.Must.T C 17:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


I noticed that after my lunch break that my user page has been vandalised (for the first time), however you already fixed, and blocked the user. Appreciate it greatly. --sumnjim talk with me·changes 20:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)