User talk:J Milburn/archive6

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

This is an archive of past discussions. Please do not edit it, it is for reference purposes only. If you wish to continue a discussion here, please do so on my talk page.



Can I ask why you think that this is redundant to the other? It would be far more logical to use this one, as it actually has a fair use rationale... J Milburn 10:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Had to choose one, chose rezerobox.jpg because it was a matter of they arent any different. Apart from the fair use, which i didnt even consider. Salavat 01:49, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Wondered if you could help me[edit]

Hi, I received a phone call today from a friend of mine Roger Webster who told me about vandalism that has occured to his article (that I created). He requested a few things and I was wondering if you could help with them:

  1. The Article about him (and respective pictures) be removed from Wikipedia. (I have done most of the edits so if possible could it be deleted without going through any processes)
  2. If it was possible to trace the last editor (before my vandalism revert) as he said he found the edits "shocking beyond belief". The account was clearly set up by someone who knows him, due to the nature of some of the changes. And was also created with the sole intention to vandalise that page due to the user name referring to him.

If you could help with any of these things or need further information please contact me as he sounded perturbed on the phone. Thanks in advance, Asics talk Editor review! 17:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

It's alright your entitled to watch some terrible TV once in a while! In my opinion everything looks good now. I've spoke to Roger and given him the link and he said he will get back to me within the next few hours. Hopefully he will allow it to be on, because to some people it could be very useful! We'll see! But as you said Alison and some other admin are helping out, so thanks for pointing me out to the administrators noticeboard! Thanks again for your help, Asics talk Editor review! 19:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Shark Aerobics from the Point of View of a Midget Poultry Farmer[edit]

On your user page you claim to now know about much that is interesting enough to go in the 'Did You Know?' section. I think you are being overly modest here, as you don't include reference to your book 'Shark Aerobics from the Point of View of a Midget Poultry Farmer'. Although the topic is slightly obscure (somewhere between Neo-Classical Belgian Jazz Folk Metal and Winklebury Hill), I'm sure many facts from it could be used on 'DYK?', and it would serve to highlight the plight of Midget Poultry Farmers, about which you speak so passionately in your book On a side note, what experience do you have on the topic of Shark Aerobics from the Point of View of a Midget Poultry Farmer? I didn't recieve adequate detail in the four page introductory notes, and the seven page author bio which you included. :) 23:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense... J Milburn 07:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

J Milburn[edit]

What instruments do you play? as a matter of interest. Can you get back to me on my talk page? Orgel 17:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Response to your message[edit]

If you go to a performing arts college, i'm sure you would be great at playing an instrument. and which college do you go to?(you dont have to reply to this question if you dont want to)But if you want to or tell me something else please contact me on my talk page any time.Orgel 17:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

About User:InFairness[edit]

J Milburn, is it possible for you to check this users page as it contains some stupid articles and is very misleading Kind regards Orgel 19:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


You left me a message that Blayse was SPEEDILY deleted from Wikipedia for not being a "noteworthy" artice... yet I logged in today and the EXACT SAME INFORMATION has been posted, just in a different format, one of the guys names were misspelled, and the bios were lop-sided, meaning 3 of the guys had lengthy bios and one had just a dribble.

I corrected the errors and made updates. Now I am concerned that the updates will be discarded like the article was for not being "noteworthy"...

Geesh... Ok, thanks for letting me get that out - LOL!

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!![edit]

Thanks for helping a neophite! I read the articles you posted on my discussion and GREATLY appreciate your taking the time to help me write better entries.

I look forward to using my industry knowledge to build on stubs and create missing entries.

Thank you again for your help! Txcrossbow 18:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

"Source is given"[edit]

Hi! I disagree that a "Source is given" on Image:SpikeAndFaye.jpg and Image:SpikeSpiegelM01.jpg. What it does say is who owns the image copyright, but it doesn't say where the image was taken from. Punkmorten 11:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


I have left a link to the discussion on the Beatles discography page on the talk page of several prominent discography pages which have had images removed in the last week or so. It seems entirely appropriate to prevent any discussion of the removal of the images from taking place on all of those pages and instead to have any such discussion in one place. You must realise that people will question the removal of these images from these and other discography pages and that it is better to have the discussion in one place and not all over the place. Jooler 13:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Barrow offensive[edit]

Hi JMilburn, been away for a bit, concentrating on other things. Appalled by the quality of the Barrow-in-Furness article (see reasoning in Talk:Barrow-in-Furness) so am launching a cleanup offensive on it. I made a luke-warm attempt a couple of weeks ago but there are a group of anonymous users who revert any changes without discussion. I'm aware of the three revert rule - but I'm unsure how to do a revert at all (short of copy and paste!). How do you engage those with an IP address - is there a set procedure for dealing with it? I take it they will never see anything on their 'talk page'. Aside from that - can you add it to your watchlist, to avoid large amounts of edits disappear under blanket reverts as well as small scale vandalism? Will also try and tick some of the boxes on our Askam to-do list. Cheers Kijog 09:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for joining the cleanup! First off I'll be concentrating on the history prose (integrating trivia) and will attempt to reference as much as possible. We'll see how that goes. Kijog 10:26, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


Ok... how am I doing? I spent most of the day yesterday reading through the guidelines and learning more about being in compliance. The more complicated formats are still way over my head, but I am relying on Wiki-veterans to help with cleaning them up (I think you call it wikifying) and I can follow examples as I grow.

At this point, I am having difficulty understanding the photo guidelines for upload. I have a ton of photos from press kits to be used with press releases, etc. Am I to understand that these are not Wikable (smile)?

I created new articles for Gary Jenkins, Terrell Phillips and Tony Grant (Singer). I look forward to your feedback.

Lastly - please give me feedback on the Blayse article and what can/needs to be done to Wikify the article or what I can do to help. It has been flagged.

THANKS FOR SHOWING A NEWBIE SOME LOVE! Txcrossbow 12:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I think I am going to need an entire day to review the photo guidelines. I'll get an understanding eventually. Thank you for the heads up on the article signing, sections, etc. I'll make those adjustments now. As far as my writing style, like you said, there isn't much information out there about the artists I have added. Even though their individual contributions are significant, there has not been much written about those contributions or accolades as individuals and developing content for the articles has been a challenge - picking info from blurbs about them from marketing materials released by their former groups, etc.
Hopefully, as the content is surfed and found by Wiki users over time, perhaps other users will take a moment to add content and the articles will build from there - I got them started and know they will grow from there. Thanks again! I'm off to edit my boo-boos!
In looking at my watchlist - what does the number indicate? I.e., next to Terrell Phillips (-8)

Brandt AfD[edit]

Hi JM, frequently posting comments on AfDs can make for an aggressive atmosphere. As you've posted nine times already, I hope you'll consider calling it a day. I know this topic arouses strong feelings, but that's all the more reason not to fan the flames. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 18:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. :-) SlimVirgin (talk) 18:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Please desist from attacking me on said afd for diagreeing with you accuusing me of all sorts of basura as such comments will harm rather than help your cause. And I fully agree with Slim's above comments too, you appear not to have taken them on board, SqueakBox 18:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
oops I think I misread the year onn your oldest contribs, I see you have been around a while, but you are still very young in life and your comments werent appreciated re accusing me of trying to tip the balance on the afd while trying to do so yourself. I am happy to debate the rights and wrongs of the DB article in an adult way, SqueakBox 18:40, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

D&D wiki project consensus[edit]

A call to all members of the D&D wiki project. We are currently having a major dispute that needs to be settled by all members of the D&D wiki project. The dispute is as follows. 1. Should we put disambiguation tags on D&D articles preemptively or should we wait until there is an article conflict with some other Wikipedia article. Vote on preemptive or wait.

2. What should we label these tags? Example "child's play (module)", or "child's play (adventure)" and at this point we are taking all suggestions.

email me at or post on the D&D wiki project talk page Dm2ortiz 13:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Module articles I have "half" created[edit]

Hey, I saw the articles on D&D modules you created recently, and there are a couple of problems with them. The main ones are the lack of context, and the possible copyright violation in the form of the blurb text. First of all, the context- a lead paragraph will be needed, or, in the case of mass produced stubs such as this, just a lead line. Something like-

Next- the blurb text. We don't copy, if at all possible. Not only is it a copyright violation, but it is certainly not neutral. Also, please cite some reliable sources. Finale comment- your images should have a fair use rationale as well as the copyright tag. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. J Milburn 17:59, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

yes I konw they are unfinshed. I strat them at work and tryu to finsh them at home. Wiki is ok with empty pages. there is no copyright violation. I copy what is fully legal and a considered a primary source. I am making full cite list for evrything

Moore, Roger E. (1998). Return of the Eight. World of Greyhawk: TSR, Inc. p. 64. ISBN 0-7869-1247-2. 9576XXX1502. 

i only have two done so far. And not every thing needs a "fair use rationale" like book covers. I'm okay just need more time, work just gets in the way ha ha Dm2ortiz 18:32, 12 June 2007 (UTC) BTW i like how you write your points on the talk pages

The use a book cover (front and back), Table of Contents and Credits not only legal only but encouraged by the book seller
the thing is i can't think of much to say about them. I was hoping someone would add to them like my The Long Winter (novel)
oh no the back cover has to be word for word to be legal
duh wehat was i thinking I need to add stub when i start them. thanks


They're basically redirects that mean 'this guy is our leader'/'this guy rocks' in Japanese. --Kurt Shaped Box 20:38, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Snow Leopard[edit]

Well, the SL is obviously not extinct, but it is endangered (and declared so by IUCN). The fair use images you removed were all of wild snow leopards (for example, in national parks) and all meant to accompany text about wild populations or about conservation. As far as I am aware, there are no public domain images of wild SLs. The image at the top of the article was taken in a zoo. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Los Altos Flag[edit]

I made the flag.

Template:Soft-drink-stub - Thanks![edit]

Apologies about messing up the usage in the template. I never edit templates and had only intended to put some documentation there. Thank you for catching my mistake.

--KNHaw (talk) 22:47, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Conan the Mercenary disambiguation[edit]

Hi. You added a note to the top of Conan the Mercenary stating "For the Dungeons & Dragons module of the same name, see Conan the Buccaneer (module)." (my emphasis). I'm assuming this was a copy-and-paste error, but I'm just dropping you a note here in case I'm missing something subtle (or something incredibly obvious for that matter!). Cheers, and thanks for your work on this stuff recently --Pak21 21:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Removing Images from Metin Yuksel[edit]

You said you removed the images from the Metin Yüksel page because they weren't licensed, but those images are scans from a 1980s Turkish Islamist publication which is likely no longer in print. I highly doubt anyone will complain about the use of those 'unlicensed' images.

Your GA nomination of Celestiial[edit]

The article Celestiial you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.png, see Talk:Celestiial for eventual comments about the article. Well done!

G1ggy Talk/Contribs 07:02, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Image Copyright[edit]

If I was to take a screenshot from a music video, could that be used on wikipedia (i.e. to illustrate styles of dancing)? Also, is it allowed to use screenshots taken from just the public's videos on places like youtube? If these are allowed, I guess the first one would be "Music Video/Promo screenshot" but what would the other one's copyright be? Thanks again for your help, Asics talk Editor review! 11:51, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

On the Hardcore Dancing page, there is talk of all the different "moves", yet only one very poor illustration of it. Whereas, there are many videos on youtube that illustrate hardcore dancing and all its related moves. This is a music video, and it illustrates lots of moves, there is also, this, this (by, and this that have different other moves on. Would that be allowed? Asics talk Editor review! 12:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
I was going to expand the explanations anyway, i.e. have subsections for each dance move, but I will try and get free pictures, next time I go to a gig, I'll take a few photos, and see what I can do! Asics talk Editor review! 12:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Paul Potts[edit]

I reside in Whales and attended the final and semi-final episodes of Britains Got Talent. This picture of Paul was taken via digital camera and I uploaded it non-photoshopped to wiki and I release it to the public. Deuce Anti 07:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


I understand your concerns in relation to my username as these views are rejected by many and accepted also by many. I seek only to have something which is part of my identity in my own life represented here. I am Scottish, and a Scottish Nationalist and, as a result, support Scottish Independence. My support for this is not racist or bigoted, nor is it fueled by racist or bigoted views. My support for this cause is borne out of my belief that the Scottish people should, could and, ultimately, will have full control over their own affairs, including military and foreign policy.

I am a descendant of Irish people who migrated to Scotland during An Gorta Mor and, as a result, I have an affinity with the Irish people (many whom I have contact with over the Internet). I have researched Republicanism and support it, knowing that it would have been democratically correct in 1919 to establish Ireland as a nation independent of Britain and also believing that is the correct and best route for Ireland and her people to take. (However, I must state that I support the Good Friday Agreement

I tried many other usernames of the same ilk, but in Gaelic, in the hope that they would not be as "shocking", such as Saor Alba, Saorsise na h'Eireann or Alba Gu Brath.  However, it seems that they were too similar to current usernames.

If you wish to change the username, please choose which of the following would be most appropriate:

Keep The Faith

Scots Nationalist, Republican sympathiser

Scots Nationalist

We Will Be Free

We Will Be Independent

--Saor Alba--

Thank you for consulting me and good luck with your GCSEs- I'm awaiting Higher results so I know how you feel.

        Could I please use "Ultra Anthony" as a username, or would Anthony1888 be more advisable?
Just a line (as you've have some that are contrary) that I too would support a change of name for this particular user, and think you requested so in an admirable fashion. Jhamez84 01:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Bloody hell! I've just realised you're the contibutor to Askam and Ireleth whom I spoke to some time ago! - Congrats on the adminship! I'm quite jealous. Good luck with this user renaming however. Jhamez84 01:53, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Mark Evan's images[edit]

Got your messages, no objections with that. :) - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 16:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Rogue image[edit]

I am 100% certain Image:Rogue(musician).jpg has been released under the GFDL. Zwilson 17:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


Why was the image removed? I am a member of the BVLS and run the official website, why did you not consider discussing this with me - the page creator, why it would be removed before you did it? The image is from BVLS gremlinprince

Stop vandalizing[edit]

Can u stop vandalizing the articles ????

It is the 2nd time i wrote the article on RosAsm, and i´m a user of wikipedia since years. The article was according to the wiki standards and others wiki users was helping rephrasing, editing the article to it fits to the wikipedia.

So, stop doing this. This kind of atitude is anti-democratic, and anti-GPL. The article is NOT a Spam, and was created to provide more info on assemblers.

If u have issues with software articles, you should also delete HLA, Masm, Fasm, Nasm, Tasm, ReactOS, Windows, Vista and so on.

I asked for help many times while i was doing the article and NO admin/editor willed to help to make it fits to what they seems to be needed.. No, you simply vandalized the whole page after i have read the standards and that after other wiki users, nicely helped to edit the article to it best fits ?

If u have issues with software articles it would be better you contact the author of the articles, instead vandalizing it.

Best Regards,


--B2kguga 20:49, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


His ArbComm case is relevant, especially the active revert parole. One Night In Hackney303 22:52, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

You don't need to read all of it. He's limited to one revert per week, it's documented at the bottom. In the past "article" has been seen to cover all spaces by the ArbComm, and given the extensive revert warring he would seem to be in breach. One Night In Hackney303 22:56, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Indeed. While userspace might be exempt I'd expect the egregious edit warring to be in breach of the spirit of the parole if not the letter at least, especially given the nature of what was being removed. One Night In Hackney303 23:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Check his block log if you haven't already, in particular the one about "nuclear war". I've had very few dealings with him, save when he persisted in trying to spoil the lead of an article, then removed me explaining why the other version was preferable from his talk page claiming it was a "personal attack", then reverting any subsequent requests to be civil and engage in discussion. One Night In Hackney303 23:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Left a message here earlier, seeing as Brad seemed insistent the information shouldn't be added back, and it was added back with an edit summary of "rvv" no less! One Night In Hackney303 19:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing this up and sorry for any hassle you're experiencing, but it's routine where POTW is concerned. This user is disruptive beyond belief. I've never worked out how to have a rational discussion with him since he doesn't appear to use anything resembling an argument. --Folantin 19:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


Hi J

Thanks for the answers.

I wrote the new article from an old backup i have. As you will see it needs editing to fits to the wiki standards. Unfortunately i didn´t saved the last edition before it was deleted.

I posted a note for you on the article to you help the edition. I´m currently online to help editing too.

One question, at the time i wrote that backup, i didn´t knew about the permission to use light/soft colors on the background of an article. I read the standards, but found nothing saying that it was not allowed to use the way i did, but... i´m unsure if it is on the standards or not. Can it uses colors on the way i did ?

Also, as you will see, it contains some minor grammatical errors. This is because i´m not a native english speaker, and i may commit some language mistakes more frequently.

Best Regards,

Guga --B2kguga 15:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Trivium GA[edit]

I'm just going through every article that links to 'Trivium' so that it directs stragith to either the band or the education thing. Then I'll have my tea, but that should be over and done with by 7, so yeah, I'm up for it! I'll start by looking for citations for parts of the information that are not already cited. Then see if I can find any extra images (if necessary) and we'll see how it goes! Asics talk Editor review! 16:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Citation Tags - I'll remember that in the future! Thanks! Asics talk Editor review! 20:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Article Editing (see here)[edit]

Hey I was wondering if as an Admin I could get your input on what to do about the issue I'm having with redirects for some articles, Trivium's article in particular. I've created a third option for now, but I don't know what to do as I'm sure the band should be found when searching for "Trivium" rather than the out-dated latin name for Trivia, as there already is a {{For}} for it in the header of Trivium (band). There's also further debate on whether searching for "iron maiden" should link to the band or the medievil torture device, I proved with some google searching that the band is much more notable. Could you possibly give me some input on what to do from now as I don't want to breach 3RR again, but when I was discussing it with the other editor he seems to be falsely representing the facts, but I'm assuming he's using a different search engine or something.

Sorry for the essay length of this query, but I'm in a bit of a muddle and I think you as an Admin could probably clarify the situation, Thanks. ≈ Maurauth (Ravenor) 20:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Andy Mabbett[edit]

I do have a problem with the way your good intentions seemed rapidly to head downhill into a partisan stance. But I'm too tired to analyse the whole thing right now, and need to do some real life work before going to bed. We'll maybe speak more next week - I tend not to be a daily visitor to wikipedia these days. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Okay, still with the caveat that I should be working or sleeping rather than thinking about this thing, I think the things on my mind are:
  • Should you have edited Andy's page to remove the paragraph? By doing so, you are getting completely involved in the situation, rather than standing to one side and asserting policy.
  • Was ANI the best place to raise the issue of Andy's non compliance with efforts to get the parapgraph removed? ANi is, as I understand it, a place for non-admins to bring things to the attention of admins. You are an admin.
  • If the paragraph is against policy and Andy will not remove it, is the path to take not RfC or arbitration or somesuch, rather than ANI.
  • Not least, as you've seen, all that your actions have engendered so far is a wheel war on Andy's page, and a 24 hour ban on Andy for having the temerity to disagree with you and seek to control the content of his user page. That is not a great result; it has done nothing to settle the matter, and it has inflamed the situation some more - exactly what admin actions should not do.
  • I think a cold rereading of all of your comments on ANI will bear out the assertion that you move from a balanced reportage of your view of the problem, to being principle tenor in the choir of those who would have Andy's scalp. IMO, you lose credibility in proportion with the extent to which you become a cheerleader ("will someone not take action") rather than a disinterested admin.
  • Finally, you have to ask whether there is much point in getting involved in the Andy versus Leonig dispute. It tends to be quiescent unless someone (like you) tries to intervene in it, whereupon it springs into life again. I've learned that there are some things that are wrong in this world that it is better not to seek to right, since in attempting to right them, you're as likely to make matters worse. It's a counter-intuitive observation, since we all want to right wrongs. YMMV.

Something like that. In other news, when Andy is not annoying the hell out of people, he does good work and I value his contributions. I don't think by any stretch of the imagination that his propensity to annoy outweighs his positive contributions. Finally I am not a cheerleader for Andy; I had a fairly severe crossing of swords with him within the last three months, over the locateme template, and thought his arguments in that instance sucked. But I still find him well worthwhile. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Askam and Ireleth[edit]

When are you going to add anything about the geographical features such as "Greenscoe Wood", "Blea Beck" etc? TheTrojanHought 14:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Does this- count as a source for the names of the wood etc? TheTrojanHought 14:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Meldshal42/The Potato Club[edit]

Could you speedy delete this? It is a case of u1 that was mistakenly brought to AFD. I have closed the AFD and I just need an admin to carry out the deletion. Thank you! — Moe ε 21:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! — Moe ε 21:57, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Operation Moonwatch[edit]

Re your AFD, er yes, you are completely wrong. [1]. This is a well known programme familiar to most people who know anything about the history of the space programme. You might like to withdraw it before a pile on begins. Nick mallory 23:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of "Tour de force"[edit]

I was thinking CSD A5 (transwiki/dicdef), but there is no deadline anyway. Thanks for the heads-up. YechielMan 11:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced album banners?[edit]

Is there a particular reason you tagged the talk pages of non-album pages Precious (album) and Karma (album) with {{Album}}? --Piet Delport 15:59, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


Hi, regarding this image. Unfortunately this still is no source. That internet site simply used the same image we did. To be public domain (which it likely is and why I haven't deleted it yet) we need to know when it was published (roughly) or what artist made it or in what book was it printed etc etc. See for a long and annoying discussion my talk page and User_talk:Zsero#Image:Rashi.jpg. Garion96 (talk) 16:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Since no one provided a source I deleted the image for now. I will go to the library this week and see if I can get another image. Or perhaps the same if I find the source listed somewhere. Garion96 (talk) 19:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Awaiting your response[edit]

I'm awaiting your response (to my comment time-stamped 19:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)) on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Pigsonthewing. Andy Mabbett 15:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I have nothing to say about the matter. J Milburn 15:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
You have nothing to say when another user has called me a "cunt", called me "a prick", recently vandalised my user page and admitted editing only for the purpose of stalking me; but you want to ban or block me for saying that I therefore do not believe they act in good faith? What a strange sense of proportion you have. Andy Mabbett 15:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Vox Humana 8' (talk · contribs)[edit]

I reveiewed the block on the above editor and I concur with your vouch comments. Not totally sure why he was blocked, given that he was not being disruptive and given the evidence. I've unblocked him now, so he should be out and about again now. Thanks for supporting the guy, and for pointing out your own COI - Alison 13:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

He was blocked for sock-puppetry. Andy Mabbett 14:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
As I already stated, that was quite some time ago. I checked. Since then, they admitted their error, reformed and went on to be a productive editor with one account. Check the activity logs. Blocks are not meant to be punitive. - Alison 14:28, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I've already commented on you talk page, Alison. Andy Mabbett 14:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
And I have replied - Alison 14:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


Alright, alright. I admit it. I was in a bad mood at the time. I don't usually talk like that to others. It was just a period of frustration, and I'm sorry. But when I said MY images, I meant "the images I uploaded", not "images belonging to me". And what made me even angrier was the fact that those images have been on Wikipedia for so long, I thought they were fine and that ShakespeareFan wanted to delete them out of boredom.

I know now I was wrong to attack him/her like that. As I said, it was a very rare bout of anger and frustration, caused by something personal. I'm sorry, and I will apologize to ShakespeareFan as well.

Send me a message accepting my apology or not, please.

P. S: You said you will block me. If you have that capacity, please tell me about it. Jienum 14:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The Lady in the Lake trial[edit]

No problem, in regards to the name. The freegordon site has the judgement of the Crown Court, the full name is included on the front page of that, short version would just be R v Park of course. - J Logan t/c: 21:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

You & POTW & VH, redux[edit]

J Milburn, I've just read your posting on Alison's page. And I've pored over page histories for User:Pigsonthewing and César Franck, and user contribution histories for POTW, VH and you. I'm having a job reconciling the histories with your post(s) on Alison's page. I'd like to take you through your post and the evidence I can find, in an effort to see whether you'd agree that the obvious antipathy you feel for POTW is leading you to draw conclusions unsupported by the evidence; and to discuss whether campaigning against POTW as you are is entirely helpful, both fullstop and as an admin.

You say:

The original block on Vox was not for edit warring on Pigs' userpage. The original block was for edit warring over an article about a composer- that was what he apologised to me about, that is what I explained to him and what was a long time ago.

User:Seraphimblade did not identify when blocking VH, whether the block was in regard to VH's edits on César Franck, or his edits on User:Pigsonthewing. He later told Alison "The block was actually for recent sockpuppetry (less than a week ago) to violate 3RR, and the editor had stated clear intent to do more of the same in the future."

Looking at History of César Franck we see only three VH reverts, including one sock:

  • 10:25, 20 June 2007 Vox Humana 8'
  • 12:30, 20 June 2007 Vox Humana 8'
  • 14:36, 20 June 2007 EccentricRichard

(Here, btw, your friend is using socks to protect a link to his own myspace page, against policy and, unsurprisingly, against consensus.)

Looking at History of User:POTW we see four reverts including one sock:

  • 12:47, 20 June 2007 Vox Humana 8'
  • 14:42, 20 June 2007 Vox Humana 8'
  • 17:09, 20 June 2007 Vox Humana 8'
  • 09:03, 21 June 2007 AntiVandal001

It is more reasonable to suppose that User:Seraphimblade blocked VH for the POTW reverts, than the César Franck reverts.

Pigsonthewing, in his usual attempt to stir up controversy and pick a fight, decided to make it about himself, complain to everyone, and tried and start another fight.

So, we have problems with this sentence:

  • in his usual attempt to stir up controversy and pick a fight
    • POTW certainly gets into arguments, and his style is debatable. I've been watching his work for a long time now. I don't think he aims to "stir up controversy and pick a fight". He appears to me to go out and try to do things (e.g. microformats, coord, locateme) in ways which, on occasion, lead to controversies, some of which become quite bitter. There is the world of difference between going out to pick a fight, and going out to seek to improve wikipedia and finding that others disagree with the mode of improvement chosen
  • decided to make it about himself
    • it appears from the above that it was already about himself. VH made it "about himself" when he - and you, as it happens, acting as some sort of tag team - reverted POTWs user page.
  • complain to everyone
    • hyperbole aside, he complained to Alison about her unblock, to Seraphimblade who imposed the original block , and to WjBscribe ... I'm not quite sure how the latter got dragged into it. Putting aside any view of whether Andy's complaints were justified or not, it does not seem unreasonable to raise objections with the admins involved in the block and the unblock.
  • and tried and start another fight
    • is certainly one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it is that strongly disagreed with the unblock, was unaware of any protestation of a willingness on VH's part to learn from his mistake (you later posted that VH had communicated this to you through some other channel, and you interceded with Alison), and wished to press his concern.

Sadly, Vox could not resist said fight, and I support this new block for him, as he was behaving unreasonably in continuing to edit war with Pigsonthewing, Indeed. Sadly he could not resist. Subtext: he is not a malevolent Andy, just a good but weak person...

and, now, edit warring with him is simply giving him a moral victory by showing him that anyone actually cares. We do care about actions taken on wikipedia. You are an admin. If you do not care, then are you sure you should be an admin? I do have a problem with you, in effect, saying "no one should care about the wheel war campaign I joined in on, when me & my friend VH and an IP and Leonig decided that our views of what should be on Andy's page should override Andy's view of what should be on his own page ... no one should care that Andy has an issue with VH being unblocked swiftly", despite VH making statements such as 'if - in the process of fighting blatant (i. e. Pelican s***-standard) vandalism - I have to violate the 3RR rule, I won't get into too much trouble.' [2]. Who died & made you king?

I feel, once again, Pigsonthewing is behaving in a pathetic, silly manner, but that the best thing to do about that now is to ignore him. Which begs the question, why did you post three comments which plainly did not ignore him, but rather (again, in view of the evidence above) merely further your apparent grudge. And why is it POTW who is (or who solely is) behaving in a pathetic, silly manner? Was not the wheel war on User:POTW pathetic and silly? Was not using a sock to seek to evade 3RR on user:POTW pathetic and silly? Do you see that there is a certain imbalance here? You assume your own good faith and VH's good faith; indeed, you vouch for him (and he craps all over you). You assume Andy's bad faith. How does that work?

You are somewhat flustered about the whole situation and hope this is the end of it. Again, indeed. I hope I've straightened at least part of it out for you.

Now I want you to try a thought experiment. And I want you first to bear in mind your own posting behaviour on the recent POTW ANI - the one in which I described you as acting as a cheerleader, not least in terms of the plurality of your postings and your terrier-like refusal to let go of the bone. Imagine that you've written something or other on your own user page. Whatever this thing is, you believe it should be on your user page. It is important to you that it is. Along come a bunch of people and play tag deletion with the thing, because they do not like it. You revert and bitch & whine about it, because the thing is important to you. One of the reverting people (not you) gets banned for a 3RR with sock. You get banned because you are on a revert parole (even though you do not consider the parole to extent to your own page .. other do, hence the ban. You happen to think that your bans is unjustified because you were reverting your own page. You serve out the 24 hours of you - to you - unjustified ban. But oh dear. Someone has lifted the ban on the other person. The ban imposed for the 3RR & sock, actions which under no circumstances are debatable. (Are you still with me? Here comes the question. Remember to remember your posting behaviour on the POTW ANI).) Do you a) STFU, or b) post bitter recriminations for the apparent duel standards?

You see where I'm going with all of this? I'm saying that you're effectively traducing the evidence, falsifying it in your head so that it supports your a priori point of view. You're giving every indication that you absolutely have not tried even for a moment to work out what the context of this whole thing might look like to Andy. AGF is completely out of the picture.

I suggest you need to go away and think really hard about this; about the possibility that irrespective of whether or not Andy is the antichrist, your approach to the Andy issue is flawed; and to ponder whether what clearly must be considered a campaign (vide the ANI and posts on talk:alison) is appropriate or is (to borrow one of Andy's stock argument devices) instead tantamount to some mix of prejudiced personal attack; and whether posts such as the that on Alison's talk page are in fact trolls disguised as innocent concern for wikipedia. --Tagishsimon (talk)

aria c jalali article[edit]

when would be a good time to restore that? he's getting more press and is releasing proper records. Stan weller 19:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)