User talk:Mendaliv/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

Vandalism... Again

Hi there Mendaliv, I was recently on the page where it tells Wikipedian admins. who has recently been vandalizing wikipedia. This IP 71.205.141.55 that you gave repeated warnings to has vandalized flight song once more. I am not yet on the counter-vandalism unit yet, nor a Wikipedian Admin. like you, but I want to catch these vandals. If you could please block him for vandalizing again that would be great. PLEASE feel free to contact me at anytime or look at my WikiStatus at the bottom of my Userpage. Thank you for your help, and I appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia. entertainU (talk) 01:12, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not an admin, but I had reported him to WP:AIV, and an admin has blocked the IP for 31 hours. Good luck! —/Mendaliv//Δ's/

Thanks anyways! Happy Editing! entertainU (talk) 01:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Abaddon change

You wrote on my user page:

Welcome to Wikipedia. One or more of the external links you added in this edit to Abaddon do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. You may wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 01:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

This comment makes no sense. I did not add an external link, I removed one, which you have now put back. I really don't understand why the Wikipedia page on the biblical figure/place Abaddon should have a link to a page about a video game monster which happens to share the name. Did you perhaps mistakenly think I had added the link I removed? In that case, you should probably remove it again. 75.22.28.159 (talk) 01:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah crap, I'm very sorry about that! You're exactly right; I looked too quickly and thought you'd added that link. I've fixed the problem. You can feel free to remove that warning. Thanks for telling me! —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 01:32, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Gruntz

Why did you add a cleanup tag? Why didn't you just revert the gamecruft? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 02:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I didn't consider it necessarily vandalism; i.e., I figured it was good faith and that some stuff could be salvaged from it. Thus I slapped a cleanup on it. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 02:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, I don't consider it a vandalism either, trust me. I would make a good faith summary. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 02:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

My user page

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page!! LeaveSleaves (talk) 03:06, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

on my link to Aeschylus' Oresteia

Hi, Mendalive. I've just got this upsetting message from you:

"Please do not add inappropriate external links, as you did with this edit to Aeschylus. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 01:37, 28 September 2008 (UTC)"

The link that I have added on that "external links" section, was to my translations of the Oresteia plays by Aeschylus. There is no "Translations" section under which I could do this, as is with all other Ancient Greek plays discussed in the wikipedia - and I don't know how to perform that exercise. I think perhaps you could try and add that section yourself and then you could also add a link to my URL.

If, however, all this is too irregular and too offensive to the protocol of editing that page then, by all means, delete my entry. But I can assure you, I have never intended to vandalise Wikipedia -rather, to help readers by providing them with a URL where they can see those plays and other works in an excellent English translation. I'd appreciate it very much if you could communicate with me at:

jacker00@y7mail.com

Many thanks, George Theodoridis —Preceding unsigned comment added by Solowords (talkcontribs) 05:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hm, I'm sorry if the level of warning concerned you. The reason I gave that strong a warning was due to the presence of two much-less severe warnings on User talk:58.175.81.202, which I'm assuming you were editing from at that time. The problem, you see, is those edits appeared to simply promote a website, and from the sound of things it's your website. While it appears that my edit was in error, it's a bit concerning that other editors had agreed with similar edits. In looking now, I don't consider your contributions to be counterproductive, but I think they look questionable. Much like a man reaching into the breast pocket of his trench coat- is he going for a business card or a revolver? My suggestion would be perhaps to reword the external link to something like "English translations of several of Aeschylus' works" and have them point directly to the works in question. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 08:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


Fine. Mendalive. I have made a great many "changes" because I have recently changed my URL. I don't think this will happen again for a very long time. As for the Aeschylus page, the reason I added those three particular plays on the link is because they are the constituents of Aeschylus' "Oresteia," which was the subject of that article. I took my lead from the entry on Herbert Weir Smyth, on the same list of translations. Iridescent has given me a little more information about the workings of the wikipedia and I'll make sure to use the edit summary box in the future. Please do take a look at my response there if you have the time. Many thanks, 21:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Solowords (talkcontribs)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my page. --Nlu (talk) 15:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help! —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 18:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Pibb Xtra.png

You're right, it's terrible.

Just get rid of it.

Rik Maksen(Talk here) 17:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hm you could always put a {{db-author}} tag up on the image description page, since you're the original uploader. That would probably get it deleted immediately rather than having to wait for the IFD to end. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 18:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Re

You're welcome! Pinkadelica (talk) 04:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Your note re that Jeff Eden thing

Hey there. I took a look at the blanking; I suspect the discussion is probably turning up on Google when searching for the artist in question, and there was some discussion there that was critical of him. Frankly, I don't think it's worth reverting; if anyone wants to see what's going on they can check the history easily enough. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:36, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2008 Newsletter

The September 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also note that after the roll call for active members, we've cleared the specialized delivery lists. Feel free to sign-up in the relevant sections again!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Loews

That's better. Thanks. Markhh (talk) 02:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Editor Assistance Requests

Hi Mendaliv, just a quick request, when you tag requests as resolved (or otherwise), could you sign them please? They're archived 2 days after being tagged, and it's done manually not by bot, so it's handy to have the timestamp on. It's also quite good to have a signature so we know who's tagged it. Occasionally requests are prematurely tagged as "resolved" by people who are involved in disputes when others don't agree the issue is resolved. To sign in the temaplate, just put {{Resolved|1=~~~~}}. Anyway, thanks for helping out there. Best, epicAdam(talk) 15:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Gotcha. Sorry, about that. I thought I'd seen that most of the other ones marked resolved weren't signed. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 22:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

MichaelRiconosciuto.jpg

[This topic was moved to Image talk:MichaelRiconosciuto.jpg by Hag2 (talk) 15:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC) ]

Me

Thankyou for letting me know.andycjp (talk) 11:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem! —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 13:58, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the warning

this IP is from a school computer, so it may be used by multiple people each day.  :P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.220.90.98 (talk) 17:15, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

BarnStar For You

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
This is for all of your hard work reverting vandalism with the help of huggle! Keep it up!!! ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 17:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
No Problem :) You deserve it. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 17:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
And thanks for reverting that mstake revert of mine :) ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 17:47, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Talk:World Chess Championship 2008

I don't think you have to be too worried about personal attacks at Talk:World Chess Championship 2008 as apparently User:Sentriclecub considers the remarks to be mocking me. ([1], [2], and [3]). I'm not really sure what he's talking about, however, as his writing is often not very clear. 165.189.91.148 (talk) 18:50, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes actually I was writing more. I have had a bad day. This person has really brought me down to their level. I baited the person, and shouldn't have to mock him, but here's my day...
    • The ip guy continues to make reverts after I gave him a 3rr warning everything outlined here and he continues to violate all the rules but a chess admin gives me a 3rr warnning and not this disruptive user, but just gives him a 2nd 3rr warning which isn't policy. If he breaks the first 3rr warning, its supposed to be a 24 hour block. I'm not well received by the chess community because I proposed chessmetrics for deletion citing WP:NOTE
I basically lost some of my confidence today and acted immature. I don't see why a disruptive editor isn't blocked. He's been harassing me since 14 Oct. and his continued undo's have gotten to me. He or she is not a good writer. No one sees that he's a bad writer, and if they did he would get blocked. I can point to several great edits and contribs which I've worked on, but this editor is given way too much leaniency at my expense. I'm a volunteer, I'm not paid to get harassed. I'm not asking for his block now, because I've taken the page off my watchlist, and I've taken a personal hit from wikipedia and blocking him too late wouldn't fix anything, would just get him more motivated. Sentriclecub (talk) 19:41, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Phew, looks like I stepped in on something between you two! Sentriclecub, as I think you've learned, 165 has every right to edit anonymously (except for some special circumstances). Since you've only just started written Conscious to complain, I think I'm going to leave this to him. As to 165, I may have misread your comment; I'd interpreted the item about IQ being something you said, but regardless, your response was rather uncivil. My main point of advice to the both of you would be to chill out and try to discuss things rationally. There are a number of methods to gain outside assistance here if you need it (WP:EAR, WP:3O to name a couple). —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 21:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Actually "I have 20 points higher than genius, you'd instantly lose in a clear format." is a direct quote from Sentriclecub. I think you are wise to not want to get involved. 165.189.91.148 (talk) 21:24, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
That I understand now, but I still feel your response to that violated WP:CIVIL. That's really all I have to say about it, honestly. :-) —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 21:25, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Questions About Posting

Was just windering how best to post external links to relevant content without getting reverted. I thought i was following guidelines Duardon (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Your links mainly violate the guideline WP:ELNO, specifically points #5 and #8. I don't think linking to TheMapStore in general would be acceptable. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 20:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Understood, thanks for the clarification. I see the content of these links as a valuable supplement to their respective articles. Are there specific reasons why *List of wineries in Sonoma County (potential violation of point #5) and *Sonoma County Wine Regions (map) (potential violation of point #8 (i.e. Javascript)) is acceptable? Thanks... Duardon (talk) 23:53, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
The links from sonomagrapevine.org are probably acceptable; javascript is generally fine, but a webpage that needs flash or a java applet (i.e., when you view it, you get that icon of a coffee cup in your system tray on a PC), isn't. I'm not so sure about appellationamerica.com. To be perfectly honest, I'm not a wine aficionado myself; I tend to drink fortified wines. :-) You might want to ask over at the Wine WikiProject and the discussion page for the External Links guideline page. The Editor Assistance requests board is another good place to ask for general advice. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 01:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Just a wino butting their nose in (Hope you don't mind Mendaliv). In regards to Duardon questions, for wine articles one major factor in adding links is whether it includes (from the first paragraph of WP:EL) "information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail; or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy." First preference is to include as much relevant information in the article, attributed to a reliable source, with an external link being used only as a drastic last resort for information that the article would be incomplete without. Wine region maps are often difficult to get without encountering copyright issues so they will often be linked with a strong premium of websites that are not overtly advert/sales marketing sites. A link to "The Map Store" where customers could essentially buy the map they are looking at is very overtly a sales links and is thusly avoided. Looking at your contributions they seem to be isolated towards adding external links. I would encourage you try your hand at editing some of these wine region articles with content rather than links. They could always use improvement and the firsthand experience of working with an article will give you better understanding of what is and isn't appropriate for a link. Hope that helps! AgneCheese/Wine 03:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
It does, much thanks.. Duardon (talk) 16:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Terrytowelling?

I'm not sure if you have the ability to view deleted pages, but this guy is bashing someone with your name. He left a difficult to read message on my talk page saying it had something to do with vandalisim? Not quite sure if this relates to you but thought I should let you know

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Terrytowelling

--Omarcheeseboro (talk) 19:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Hah, thanks for the heads up. I'm not an admin, so I can't view deleted contribs, but I'm sure I must've marked something of his (or a sock's) for speedy deletion. Means I'm frustrating whomever that vandal is. Thanks for going through the trouble of reporting the guy and all that! —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 22:07, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Deal W. Hudson

You've recently edited this page. If you care to, would you please join the discussion I've tried to start on the talk page there. Thanks. Best, David in DC (talk) 21:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't think I will participate. My edit was only as a vandalfighting measure using Huggle; IsleofPatmos had blanked the page, and as he wasn't the page creator, it struck me as vandalism. Beyond that, I don't have any interest in the topic, and am a bit too busy to get involved there anyway. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 03:59, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Hello, you sent me a note about a discussion. I'm embarrass to say, I cannot locate the discussion. Can you please guide me. Thank you.--RexerX (talk) 15:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, the discussion has since been archived, and can be found here. While I'm not here to comment on the veracity of the claims made in that discussion, seeing as no actions were taken against you, you can pretty safely ignore it for the time being. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 20:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the direction. I think I'd rather steer clear of that mess and will circle around should I see anything brewing or if help is needed with edits, protocol, etc. --RexerX (talk) 03:51, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
No problem. Like I said, I wouldn't worry too much, but all the same it's better to take extra care while working on articles when some of the current editors are embroiled in controversy. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 12:50, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Reverted Edit

You reverted my vandalism in seconds. That was fast, in fact, I was in the middle of reverting it myself.78.16.186.38 (talk) 19:00, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Well honestly, how long do you expect an edit like that to stand? —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 19:02, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

i take it it's on your watchlist then. I really should get an account.Captain Ingold (planned username) (For Gondor!) 19:04, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Nope, we just have good anti-vandalism tools these days. Huggle, for example. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 19:05, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I know what Huggle is, but it's such an un-antivandalism word! Stop right there! This is the HUGGLE!!78.16.186.38 (talk) 19:08, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd tend to agree with you; Smackle or Revertex might be a bit more suitable, but I digress. Back to work. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 19:09, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Have a nice day. Amn't I such a polite vandal.78.16.186.38 (talk) 19:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Disagree - Contact info for problems

I don't understand why important & verifiable information can not be included in the discussion of a subject.

I don't want to step on your toes - please don't get me wrong - I simply disagree (and I can argue 4 sides of a 2 sided argument....)

I believe you've either made an invalid deletion and/or pointed me to a reference which doesn't relate to the deletion.

I argue that the "..not a directory" paragraph is not applicable here as the information I provided is not for sales, advertising or conducting general business and thus I believe the information should not be censored.

Agree/Disagree/Get an admin involved?

I saw that you've lost a member of your family - please accept my sympathy and understanding and also note that this is not an urgent issue.

I also saw your interest in something dear to me - chow chow - good luck with this subject as members of my family can't even agree on the ingredients.

Many thanks, Somethingshiny Somethingshiny (talk) 14:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page. Thanks again for your kind words- I appreciate it. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 15:00, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for returning the favor and reverting my user talk page. Best. --Igoldste (talk) 15:56, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

School page

We are teachers and students of the Spackenkill Union Free School District that are attempting to edit and add information that is factual to our school pages on Wikipedia. A user named smartyllama who we suspect is a high school student is vandalizing our efforts. Is there some way to block him from our pages? October 30, 2008 Shsvitek (talk) 18:31, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Smartyllama's edits are not vandalism, but yours may be. Please read some of the links I've put on your user talk page before continuing to edit that article, particularly about maintaining a neutral point of view and the manual of style. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 18:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Feder campaign

Why did you remove my post about the Feder campaign. This is fact and is a very vaid point. Ms. Feder's campaign has started robocalling as of Thursday 30 OCT. Today's robocall was "Have you seen the Thursday Washinton Post?" and continues for about 1 minute and a half.[1] While the democrats demanded McCain stop robocalls [2] and Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle referred to it as the dying gasps of the McCain Campaign [3]one of their own, who is presently behind in the pools 42% to 47% [4] is using it as a tactic to bolster what some would call a losing or dying campaign. The 5% margin is the closest that Wolf has ever faced in an election. Flyguybob (talk)flyguybob 10-30-2008 15:12

The fact that you received robocalls yourself is not a valid source, and constitutes original research. That's why. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 19:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Adding host

You just added the host to an IP that belongs to the American University in Cairo - presumably I should have done that, but why should it be done? I still have a lot to learn about this side of things. Thanks. Doug Weller (talk) 21:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

To tell you the truth, I just did it because the "host" field is available for that template. It's probably unnecessary, but it feels more "complete" with the hostname in there. :-) —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 21:32, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
OK, thanks, you are probably right. Doug Weller (talk) 06:30, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem

Some people... lol Sionus [talk] 22:32, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

English Americans

Seems you like to EDIT.

My source was good enough, yet you found it unconstructive.

Please define unconstructive.....

When It is fact that almost 3.5 million English people emigrated to the US from England since 1776. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.25.131.151 (talk) 22:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, honestly I was reverting on the assumption that the previous people who reverted you were correct. It wasn't initially clear that you were trying to provide a source for the article; it looked more like you were just dropping a link to some external site in the middle of the text. You might want to check out WP:CITE for how to cite sources better in articles. Thanks! —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 22:54, 31 October 2008 (UTC)