User talk:Only/Archive 13

Welcome to my talk page! I tend to reply to messages directly on here, so I suggest watching my page if you're looking for a reply. I watch user talk pages I comment on so we can keep conversations organized. I reserve the right to modify excessive signatures left here.

Archives I − II − III − IV - V - VI - VII - VIII - IX - X - XI - XII

re: adminship

Hi, either way. (For a short time there, I couldn't figure out who you were until I realized you had entered the "admin relocation program". That original moniker was a bit too notorious, eh?) Thanks for your thought about adminship, but I think I'll hold off with any decision about that for the time. And for two reasons. 1) Although I think I've discovered most of WP's important policy and discussion areas, there are a heckuva lot of backrooms around here. I'm only learning about the nooks and crannies as I stumble across them -- and a few more months to explore would help. I'd prefer to have a clearer concept of behind-the-scenes work if I ever decided to jump into it. 2) More importantly, I've got three "real life" book projects right now that should take me through February. I would love to have a good excuse to procrastinate on them... but I shouldn't. So I don't really have a large chunk of time to commit to the project right now. I'm just treading water for the moment. Springtime, probably the beginning of April, would be a better time to consider this. Cheers — CactusWriter | ^needles 13:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

My Edits

I am begining to see a pattern of you showing up where I have made edits. This has been going on for awhile. Now, you show up on WTRF-TV, WTRF-DT3, and WBOY-TV. This needs to stop. This is looking very much like you are stalking my edits and I don't like it.

As for the edits to the pages in question, those sections were there because a company chose to use not it's own wording, but the exact wording of a Wikipedia page for it's company page. This is worth noting. If you think it doesn't, like we all do, take it to the talk page. - NeutralHomer (talk) December 9, 2008 @ 23:34

It's unnecessary for a Wikipedia article. It is merely trivia. either way (talk) 00:10, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

So you say. You are not the end-all-be-all of edits. There is a little thing called consensus and you haven't tried to get it. Revert your changes and request comment on the edits. Also, answering my concerns would be helpful. - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 10, 2008 @ 00:13

How do you know that they copied from us? I think it'd be a little odd if the company copied from the Wikipedia website within five days of the article first being established on Wikipedia... Are we sure that this isn't the other way around? That someone on here copied from there? either way (talk) 00:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, being that I wrote that section....no. I know better. Also, this isn't the first time this has been done. A radio station in Berkeley Springs, WV wrote their website's history section vertabim from their wikipedia page. That page has been up for almost a year before the site was launched. It isn't unusual. - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 10, 2008 @ 00:32

This section has been removed four times from the WTRF-DT3 article by four separate editors. It has only been restored by you. I think this is a clear consensus for its removal as unnecessary trivia. It is also POV to include the "interestingly" with it because what is interesting to you may not be interesting to others. either way (talk) 00:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

If I am not mistaken, a couple of those editors were anon users....so, forgive me if I don't count them as actual editors. While waiting for your response, I asked another admin for his opinion (see here) and they see is a little differently than you.

The "interestingly" part can be rewritten and should not be removed just because of one word.

Also, an answer on my concerns from waaay above would be nice. - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 10, 2008 @ 00:52

How does he see it "a little differently"? I don't see where he addresses the question of whether or not it is trivia. He addresses the concerns with the GFDL, but nothing about the trivia in the article. And, I'm sorry, but IP editors do count in consensus forming. So I'd say that that's four editors who believe it is unnecessary trivia. If you want to note it on the talk page of the articles, go for it. I've seen that in other article talk pages before: "Portions of this article have been published in..." that kind of thing. either way (talk) 00:58, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

See, this is why I said ask for consensus. Not of people who have already removed it, but people online right now...real time. Along with not answering my concerns, you haven't done that either. What will it take for you to bring this up at RfC? - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 10, 2008 @ 01:01

Bring what up at RFC? And your "concerns" of me "stalking" you are inappropriate. If you made better edits on Wikipedia, you would not feel like you were "followed" and "stalked." It just so happens that when I see your contributions/you pop up on my watchlist, the edits often raise concern. And why is consensus only of people online currently? It seems to me that it's been removed several times over now and only you are pushing for it to stay in. either way (talk) 01:06, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

My edits raise concern? So, editing radio station pages, for you, raises concern? Updating television station pages...5 or 6 days ago...raises concern now? Come on! If you have a problem with my edits, lay out each and every edit you have a problem with. Don't go deleting something because you have a problem with me. If you do, we have a place for that, MedCab.

The reason I think we should get a accurate consensus, is because anon users are normally not considered part of a consensus in most RfCs or any Keep/Delete discussion. 99% of the time they are removed for whatever reason. Also, a consensus of people online currently helps because those people are online and not from 2 or 3 months ago and a couple anons and one admin. - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 10, 2008 @ 01:15

(un-indent) I noticed you asked Rod for his opinion as well. See, not so hard. Asking for consensus shouldn't anymore hard. - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 10, 2008 @ 01:18

When you're adding inappropriate trivia to articles, yes, that raises concerns. There really seems to be a clear consensus against having it in there. Two anonymous users, one registered user, and now two administrators have removed it or stated their rationales as to why they do not believe that this belongs in the article. either way (talk) 01:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Added it there some, what...4 months ago? You literally had to dig to find that. You are digging to find any little thing to get me in trouble. What is your "beef" with me exactly? - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 10, 2008 @ 01:21

Had to dig to find what? That several edits ago you restored trivia that does not belong in an article? Yeah, that was really digging clicking on your contributions and seeing that on the first screen I arrived at. I removed it as unnecessary trivia. I only did this alleged "digging" to four months ago when you required a "consensus." I didn't remove it to spite you or because I have a "beef" with you. I removed it because it doesn't belong in this article or any article. either way (talk) 01:25, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Didn't realize I reverted on the 7th. But that is midway down my contribs page (I know, I looked). Before that...let's just say I got to Mid-September and gave up (some 3,000 edits down). Also, after looking at the WTRF-DT3 history, it was only removed 3 times by other users before you. Don't add one.

I didn't "require" a consensus, I requested one. One that still hasn't happened. But for you to see my edits, you have to be looking at each and every edit I do....or you have two television stations from West Virginia "watched", which since you don't edit television station pages, I find hard to believe. - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 10, 2008 @ 01:34

I never said it was four plus me. I said it was four users who removed it: myself, another registered user, and two IPs. I never misrepresented that at all. either way (talk) 01:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

It sure sounded that way. But you giving me a migraine. But you never really answered my question from above. Which edits of mine are "cause for concern" for you? I honestly want to know. A list would be nice. I would also like to know what your beef is with me. - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 10, 2008 @ 01:54

I have no beef with you. And as I said, the edits of concern this time were the addition of unnecessary trivia to the article. Other times it has included your inappropriate behavior towards Calton, your poor edits in regards to images, and your civility which has led to blocks in the past. And, yes, the migraines and the need for the pills which is often invoked by you. Is that really necessary to tell everyone that you're going to go take pills every time you get frustrated in discussions? either way (talk) 02:06, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Allow me to answer these in order, if I may:

• Trivia: We have already established this one. In the matter up for discussion above, I feel it shows that Wikipedia has become so big that companies that use Wikipedia information verbatim instead of writing their own.
• Calton: Being that he has left Wikipedia since his last time on ANI (yeah, I know about it...didn't comment but I did watch the discussion) and since him and I haven't had contact for almost a year, this one is a non-issue and shouldn't even be brought up.
• Images: Now this one you are going to have to explain because I am not sure what you are refering. 99.99% of the images I upload have proper F-URs, are referenced to their sources, and have correct categorization. So...I am confused on this one.
• Civility: Since my return I haven't lost my temper, even with you. I have several editors watching to make sure I stay in line, Kubigula for one. Along with some high dose Haloperidol, my spikes in mood should be in check.
• Migraines: I think telling a person that they have actually caused another person a migraine with their behaviour works. I have had users actually apologize for their behaviour after me saying that. It isn't a lie either, I do get migraines.
• Pills: I should have left out my slight addiction to Vicodin, which I have mentioned. That is bad on my part in more ways than one. I am working on kicking that habit....which is easier said than done.

If I have missed anything, please let me know. - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 10, 2008 @ 06:37

re:Pi Kapp Stats

I wrote an explanation as to why I felt it was necessary to substitute these values with a template on the template's page. But, to put it briefly, I did it because these values are listed multiple times within the article and change rather frequently. The template allows a user to update these statics on one page so that they always remain unified and consistent. Also, I plan on incorporating this template into the List of Pi Kappa Phi chapters, List of Pi Kappa Phi alumni, and other Pi Kappa Phi fraternity related articles (and future articles that I plan on writing). This template will allow all of the figures in these articles to remain consistent and, conveniently, will make it much easier to update them. —ŁittleÄlien¹⁸² 02:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

WJHS

Hey. I have condensed the marching band section of West Johnston High School, and added a new Winter guard section. Can you please check this out and let me know what you think? Thanks. OverSeer (talk) 05:10, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Hayley Williams

Please either take this to AFD or unprotect it. The character is extremely notable - there are 49 google news hits on her right now. Protecting the page was inappropriate. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Find consensus to establish the article and then someone will unprotect it. The long-standing consensus has been this way, either way (talk) 23:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

ANI thread now up. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:04, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Why is it being discussed at the noticeboard and not on the article talk page? It's a content issue, either way (talk) 00:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

quick edit

i made a bs edit and 60 seconds later it was taken off, wow good job man — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sriot (talk • contribs)

Yup, that's how it works frequently, either way (talk) 00:55, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Hayley Williams

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Hayley Williams. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:05, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Spam

ok im sorry i didnt know. a person from the wiki council told me to spread the word that not everybody entirely trusts wikipedia and told me to tell everybody in the "D" section and to get people to start a project on it, once again im sorry it wont happen again DCsniper207 (talk) 23:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

what did you mean by external links DCsniper207 (talk) 23:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

External links means links to websites that aren't Wikipedia, either way (talk) 01:57, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Unwelcome revert to my talk page

Please do not revert edits made by other users on my talk page. DCsniper207 has a right to voice his opinions, even if you consider them spam. - Draeco (talk) 15:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

They are still spam, so that is why his and others' edits of that nature were reverted, either way (talk) 21:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Images of anchors and meteorologists

I've added my thoughts on this topic. Strafidlo (talk) 03:03, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Neutralhomer is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

A holiday greeting: Peace on Earth, good will to men...

Here is wishing you the best for the season and the coming year...

Ecoleetage (talk) wishes you peace!

Spread peace and goodwill by adding {{subst:WikiPeace}} to other's talk pages with a friendly message.

Ok Ok Sorry

I Never do again by Aparna rajesh

From SuperGirl64

I'm sorry. You are not in for verbal insults.n I get annoyed when people don't see the person inside of someone. All I need is confirmation from you, and I will add her back. Thank you and please forgive me. FORGIVE ME EITHER WAY!!

No, you may not add her back. either way (talk) 22:10, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, that's okay. I'll just se this as my punishment. Goodbye and thanks for your time. I hope this conflict is resolved.

Deletion of Category:Poschiavo.

I was not finished. But now i think you understand. The Rolling Camel (talk) 22:29, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: Knotslanding

I have replied at my talk page. Regards, — Aitias // discussion 13:18, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

You may wish to comment on here. Thanks. — Aitias // discussion 23:05, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Yup, already did. Kralizec! indefed him as a sock. either way (talk) 23:07, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

He had me fooled for a while, but his blow up this week totally gave him away. Once I got around to comparing both of their edits today, it was obvious he was another HeadMouse sock. --Kralizec! (talk) 23:20, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey

I've kind of been on here for a while, and while I was browsing through some old block logs ( a favorite past time of mine when my watchlist is stagnant), I noticed how serious you take wiki, and I was hoping you could point me in the right direction I need to go. I think technically, it would be an adoption, but I just really need someone I haven't had any kind of contact with to come in and browse my contributions and tell me where I need to be headed if I plan on being an admin anytime soon. I know first of all, my signature may need to be changed, but other than that, what should I do or refrain from doing? Feel free to forward this to someone else if you don't have the time, but I really do need someone who is very green to me and can give me an honest opinion with no regards to my feelings, well maybe regards to two feelings. Thanks in advance and Cheers!!--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 00:51, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

A quick note

You might be interested on the discussion I invited here. Thanks--Res2216firestar 04:05, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Unblock Request Notification

Hello, Only! A user you have blocked, Gp75motorsports (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), has requested to be unblocked, and your username is listed on my notification opt-in page. The unblock request is on his user talk page here. If you no longer want to recieve these notifications, remove your name from my list. If you would like to be notified about future unblock requests from this user, remove this template from your page. Thank you, DavidWSBot (talk) 05:01, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I remember Gp75motorsports (and was seriously happy to see him get shuffled off), and I think the block did it's job; it caused a disruptive editor to take a hard, long look at their actions, and found them wanting. I'd support an unblock; water under the bridge, and enough time has passed since all that drama went down that I think we should grant him a fresh start. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Everyme

I am notifying you of the above as it concerns an editor you had blocked who seems to be yet again evading a block by using at least two IPs. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 15:56, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Dear Either way,

Wishing you a happy new year, and very best wishes for 2009. Whether we were friends or not in the past year, I hope 2009 will be better for us both.

Kind regards,

Majorly talk 21:06, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

You Removed Things From MY Talk Page

I think it is really bad practice for you to remove things that someone posted to my talk page just because you disagree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurtisnelson (talk • contribs)

It is standard practice to remove the work of banned users. HeadMouse is not allowed to edit Wikipedia, and PickFoxtrot is likely HeadMouse, so, his edit was taken off. either way (talk) 02:56, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a conflict of interest here though since the post in question was negative towards you. Just because he was banned does not make his comments invalid. Kurt (talk) 03:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Ban#Reincarnations. Any edit made by a banned user through sockpuppets is automatically reverted. There is no if, ands, and "conflicts of interests" about this. either way (talk) 03:08, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Leadingonward

I believe that this user is a sockpuppet, I have my suspicions as to who it might be. If this disruption (repeated removal of a valid RfC) and harassment (abusive commentson my talk page) continue, could you be of help in tracking the culprit down? Ohconfucius (talk) 13:53, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Electric rush

The user has recently created a new page, spamming his forum. A block is in order from what I've seen of his userpage.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 01:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 80 support, 2 oppose, and 1 neutral. I appreciate all the comments I received and will endeavor to justify the trust the community has placed in me. R'n'B (call me Russ) 21:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Pro bowl page

someone messed it up can you fix it i dont know how i tried DCsniper207 (talk) 01:40, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you explain how it is "messed up"? either way (talk) 02:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

k im sorry im just in a pissy mood im under a lot of stress right now i mean messed up as in it has some players that dont belong in it and i cant remember the right ones DCsniper207 (talk) 02:14, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

well I can't help you unless you're more specific about what changes were made to the article that "messed it up." Additionally, there is no reason why this should be deleted as vandalism. If it needs to be fixed, fix it, don't look to have it deleted. either way (talk) 02:15, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

didnt mean to have it deleted just fixed ill do it DCsniper207 (talk) 02:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

k i fixed it — Preceding unsigned comment added by DCsniper207 (talk • contribs)

This whole nonsense was over one player? Philip Rivers? You went around calling people "gay" and such because one player was added in there? either way (talk) 02:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

And, as it turns out, Rivers was supposed to be in there. He was asked to replace Favre but declined due to his own injuries. either way (talk) 02:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

rivers isnt on their its all on nfl.com and it wasnt just rivers that i was argueing about with that other guy DCsniper207 (talk) 02:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

collins yes but not rivers check if you want to DCsniper207 (talk) 02:47, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Read here and many of the articles here. Favre said no, and Rivers was the first alternate, but he said no too, so it then went to the second alternate, Collins. either way (talk) 02:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

it wasn that i called him Gay for that it was like one thing and then it was different in the next 5 minutes i already apologized and lke i said a couple other things were messed up DCsniper207 (talk) 02:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

kkk i wont touch it if you change it back sorry for the troble i g2g later DCsniper207 (talk) 02:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Please See AIV...

....for the answer to your question. - NeutralHomer • Talk • January 29, 2009 @ 23:42

Courtesy blanking

Thanks for courtesy blanking this (I know why he's not been around, but won't say here). Should the talk page be blanked too? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:12, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Clean up needed

{{helpme|I just popped in to check my watchlist and I'm on my way off here. Can someone look at LOTRrules's edits in regards to Trinity High School. He did a copy and paste page move with the disambiguation, so if an admin could do some clean up there, I'd appreciate it. Sorry I can't take care of this myself! either way (talk) 22:58, 30 January 2009 (UTC)}}

Can you provide a link? Spinach Monster (talk) 16:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Spinach Monster, here you go. Antivenin 18:50, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

• Okay, I'll let an admin know. Seems they're working on it in the help channel. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 20:57, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Litherlandsand requesting unblock

He says, as you might expect, that he's not a sock and doesn't really know who this Sunholm is. What's the evidence? Daniel Case (talk) 15:29, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure, Litherlandsand states that he is a "close friend" of Sunstar NW XP. Sunstar NW XP has been confirmed by checkusers to be a sockpuppet of Sunholm. (Majorly confirmed this on Simple wikipedia and it's apparently been discussed on the checkuser mailing list). This follows the basic pattern of the Sunholm socks: give grounds for why your IP and edits might be similar to other users (past or present). In this case, his excuse is that they're good friends. This is very similar to past socks. There's also a bunch of edits that are somewhat similar (that I don't have time to access right now), but mostly they focus on templates and banned users (such as the list he made of banned or questionable IPs). Hope this helps, either way (talk) 19:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Filper01

I note that you have blocked the above user. I would appreciate if you give some insight as to what triggered this in his current incarnation as I did note any warnings in the version of the talk page prior to the block being applied. A quick review of the Special:Contributions/Filper01 do not reveal any behaviour that merits a block, except his recent creation of multiple accounts - although in mitigation all (that I looked at) have been tagged as {{doppleganger}} - although there may have been several I missed.

I have been aware of this user's previous history - as I was behind several previous sockpuppet entries leading to previous bans. In the past few weeks he has sought editor review and I felt he was showing the signs of becoming a reformed character, and I felt he should be closely supervised (having alerted an admin who was aware of his past conduct) and given a chance to show that he was capable of become a good wikipedia contributor.

Unfortunately I predict he will appear under another username sometime in the next few months, which may take a little while to identify and then determine if he is going to behave in an appropriate manner this time. Your thoughts on how to handle an future activity from this person would also be helpful. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 18:44, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

He was blocked because he is banned. If he wants to edit again, he can go through the proper channels to appeal (ArbCom, the mailing list, etc.). Using sockpuppets is not the way to get unbanned. On top of that, his edits are disruptive at times. He spends a lot of time messing in sandboxes, playing with signatures, creating user pages for long-ago blocked users (some of the accounts he was tagging hadn't edited since 2005), and creating a multitude of dopplegangers (does a person really need at least five like he has?). either way (talk) 18:47, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for this - I guess I was being to kind to him and hoping that he had changed his ways and would become a good editor through demonstrating good behaviour. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 20:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

He's back again, as Okay15 (talk · contribs). –Signalhead ^< T > 09:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess our faith that he had changed his ways was probably misplaced. --Stewart ^{(talk | edits)} 10:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I've blocked it and an IP that looks to be him. Thanks, either way (talk) 22:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Here we go again...back to the old sockpuppet routine. 78.144.172.188 (talk) 08:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:File:Brian Jones.JPG listed for deletion

Hello, Only. You have new messages at Download's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rollback

Hello. Earier you denied my rollback request as Teen Sleepover Kid (talk · contribs) (my CHU was processed). I have done some more reverting, so can you please re-review my request as it is tedious the way I am currently reverting. -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 22:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done either way (talk) 19:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

rollback

Can you grant it to me.User:Yousaf465 (talk)

thank you

I'ts been recreated 6 times since july 2008 when it was deleted for the 1st time. I finally protected it, should you need to drop a note about eswii, always feel free to come to my talk page. -- m:drini 01:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much! either way (talk) 20:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

User talk:45ODY

This user is requesting unblocking. I looked into the other editors' history a little but I don't see the connection; Fila982398 seemed to edit a lot of railway-related articles, but 45ODY didn't. Could you help me understand? Thanks. Mangojuice^talk 16:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

The main thing is the addition of {{talkpage}} to random talk pages, discussion on images of European nations, the use of the sandbox to create colorful signatures, and the fixing of a sock tag about Fila982398. all of these connect it to the recent incarnations of Fila982398. either way (talk) 20:07, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Moggiethemeow

As expected, User talk:Moggiethemeow is denying the sockpuppet claims. I would like to deny the unblock request, and have a list of evidence to use to make them look stupid, but I cannot find it. Could you perhaps post a list of the obvious connection to the other account so I can intelligently respond to the unblock request? Thanks! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure. The first edit of Moggie was to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IPv6Gate, an article which Saint-billy was constantly reverting at, trying to get it deleted: see the history. There's signs of edit warring from Saint-billy there as well. Additionally, Moggie made this post to ANI and linked to a revert war involving an IP who is an IP sock of Saint-billy which you denied an unblock for here. either way (talk) 10:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

User talk:82.132.136.219 — Is this the same fellow again? Compare [1], [2] —StaticVision (talk) 11:27, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I had my suspicions with this user as it is very unusual for a user to start participating in AfDs and adding prod templates on day 2. I did make a suggestion that it was possibly a sock to the original blocking admin, but obviously I had no further information than that. Jenuk1985 | Talk 14:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so on the IP...at least not well enough to block it further. Saint-billy wants the article deleted, so I don't know why he'd come on and take the AFD template off the article. either way (talk) 23:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

45ODY/Telephonedennis/Vilbafo534

Thanks for taking care of this one for me. Is there a quicker way to get something like this resolved, instead of opening up a SPI? Should I get you involved? Thanks, Matt (talk) 20:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Either way/On retiring

User:Either way/On retiring, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Either way/On retiring and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Either way/On retiring during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. NonvocalScream (talk) 03:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

you might be interested in reading Wikipedia:Don't Feed the Divas. It seems to have some elements that are similar with your essay.--Lenticel ^(talk) 15:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of entry for Jeremy Rosenberg

I am doing research on the Attica prison riot of the early 1970's, and I was looking for information on one of the leaders of the riot, Jeremy Rosenberg, and I see that there was an entry for him but that you deleted it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Rosenberg

Out of curiousity, can you tell me why you deleted it? Or where I can get the information that was on that page? Thanks in advance.

The article has nothing to do with that Jeremy Rosenberg, sorry. It was about a non-notable kid born in 1992. either way (talk) 01:59, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Betacommand and ANI

You know, you could have reminded me. People are forgetful, ya know. I think a reminder of that discussion would have been more polite then immediately calling for my head. Try contacting me in the future, the talk page is always open. - Neutralhomer (talk) April 13, 2009 @ 02:00

It's a topic ban, a restriction on your editing. I would honestly think you'd keep those in mind a little better. either way (talk) 02:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

After a couple weeks, I try to forget the negative issues in my life. One comment, suggesting a checkuser, should not a block require. You make mistakes (I figure) and so do I. You should have came to me first before going to ANI. This is just a rehashing of whatever problem you have for me. - Neutralhomer (talk) • April 13, 2009 @ 02:07

Negative or not, you need to keep better tabs on your own restrictions and not rely on polite reminders from others. You should have never violated your topic ban. And again with the "omg you're out to get me" complex... either way (talk) 02:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't have that "complex" if the only time your and I's paths cross is when you are trying to get me blocked. Seems like you really want me gone to me. So, excuse me if I feel that you have a problem with me. - Neutralhomer (talk)• April 13, 2009 @ 02:16

Explanation

Note on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Blatant_abuse_of_rollback Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 22:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I see that. The removal still stands though. All of the edits listed there were made in good faith and did not constitute the need for rollback. either way (talk) 22:03, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Socratic Barnstar

		The Socratic Barnstar
		For presenting a good arguement at Talk:Odle Middle School.  ;) -download | sign! 22:26, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. And please do not leave messages like this again. It is canvassing. Yes, you do not ask him to take any stance on it, but there is a reasonable presumption that he will side with you. either way (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Roberto Sergio Lopez

Why did you delete my page? --Roberto Sergio Lopez (talk) 22:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

It is an attack page about a non-notable person. either way (talk) 22:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Seven ways to greet a neighbor

It is not a copyvio. This is a directly translated, and notable section of the Arthashastra. In addition, it is not copy and pasted from the page, and upon further examination you will find that it does not contain the same text as found on the website.. User:Download (talk) 20:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, take this up with User:SoWhy, too. He's the one who removed the section as a copyright violation. It is a copy and paste of the askasia page so far as I can see. The only difference I see is that you reworded the comment about Pearl Harbor. either way (talk) 20:45, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

It is also wrong to question the notability of this concept. The subject should have a separate article as it deals directly with Chandragupta Maurya's strategies for dealing with neighboring kingdoms. User:Download (talk)20:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

It is perfectly acceptable to question it's notability. In what chapter is this section discussed? I've scanned this site briefly and can't find it (I was searching for "bheda" in particular since that's one of the strategies). There are hardly any Google hits for the concept of "Seven Ways to greet a neighbor," so I was wondering where this comes from and why it's important to have an article on. Why can't it be discussed within the article on the main text? either way (talk) 20:57, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

To my information, this concept is actually spread amongst the separate books of the Arthashastra, particularly books 12-14. It merits a separate article as it it has had a great influence on political rule and legitimacy. User:Download (talk) 21:05, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Any sources to back up this claim of great influence? So far as I can tell, it's apparently taught in some schools, but that's about all of its "influence" that I can see. either way (talk) 21:07, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm a bit stuck on that, but I'll start a deletion debate and see some other opinions. -download ׀ sign! 21:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Only. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seven ways to greet a neighbor.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please see this discussion and decide whether to change your vote to merge. T3chl0v3r (talk) 20:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Response

Now you're really starting to get on my nerves. Just because I edit an article doesn't mean you have the right to revert. I might have to get someone else to intervene if you keep following me around. FMAFan1990 (talk) 20:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

And I might need to block you if you keep editing articles inappropriately. You can't just put trivia wherever you want to, especially unsourced trivia that has no connection to the article. either way (talk) 20:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

You can't abuse authority just to not compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. There are boundaries, and you're getting close to going on the other side. Admins have been banned for abusing authority (User:Isis being a classic example). FMAFan1990 (talk) 20:10, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't be abusing authority at all. You are editing inappropriately in adding this trivia and original research to the articles. You are compromising the integrity of Wikipedia, and blocks are used to prevent further disruption. So, please, stop doing it. either way (talk) 20:13, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

But admins should not be concerned with any particular users (like you're doing with me), they need to be concerned about the whole project. FMAFan1990 (talk) 20:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

That's not necessarily true. Particular users can cause disruption to the project. In my opinion, your edits are causing disruption. either way (talk) 20:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

That's your opinion. Other admins may not agree with you. If I wanted to disrupt wiki, I would just insert clear vandalism into articles. But that's not why I'm here. I'm here to make sure as much valuable information gets onto the site as possible. Some stuff may be obvious enough that no citation would be needed. And there is a distinction between tracking disruptive people (who are banned, see WP:LTA) and wikihounding. What you're doing to me falls under the latter. FMAFan1990 (talk) 20:24, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Well you are more than welcome to take up your concerns at AN or ANI, but I am cleaning up what amounts to inappropriate edits by you. You are adding useless trivia to articles without citations. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, not a source of trivial information. Why do we need to know that Brady Anderson played another year with the Cleveland Indians in an article about Cal Ripken, Jr.? Why do we need to know that Thurmon Munson played for the New York Yankees for his entire career in the article about Bob Ojeda? Those are just pieces of trivia, not encyclopedic information. either way (talk) 20:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Your RfC

A courtesy notice to advise you that I undeleted the above; there was ongoing discussions and concerns regarding the certification could and should be resolved on the talkpage. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I have restored the talk page for it as well. either way (talk) 12:47, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm... Yes, that was likely useful... LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Stop

What part of "I don't want anything to do with you" did you not understand? Please leave me alone. - NeutralHomer (talk) 22:49, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The fact that you keep commenting at the RFC and on other related issues is a bit contradictory to your "don't want anything to do with you" stance. either way (talk) 23:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

See, that is where you are wrong. I don't want anything to do with you (a fact), but I don't want to see an RfC deleted for unacceptable and incorrect reasons. Plus, when you keep mentioning me in your comments on the RfC, I will respond to defend myself. - NeutralHomer (talk) 23:24, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

And responding here isn't supporting your stance either. either way (talk) 23:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you actually read what people write? Seriously....let me say it again..."I will respond to defend myself". You aren't disengaging either, so why should I? - NeutralHomer (talk) 23:32, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I never said I was walking away, though. either way (talk) 23:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think anyone said you were. Question for ya....what do you plan on getting out of this little back-and-forth we got going on on two seperate threads? Just curious. - NeutralHomer (talk) 23:37, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

They are two separate conversations about two separate topics. This one is about your inability to disengage. The other is about the certification of the RFC. either way (talk) 23:49, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I warned the user to stop Either, hopefully he won't reply. If he does, try not to reply to him, I'd hate to see him get uncivil.--(NGG) 23:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

It's his choice to reply or not. And I'll reply if I want as well. I just have the "power" to get users to "loose [sic] control" apparently. either way (talk) 23:56, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

As I have said on the other thread, it is dinner time here at the Neutralhomer household, so talk amongst yourself. Time for Chicken! - NeutralHomer • Talk • 23:57, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I came across a old Vandal.

I found a sockpuppet of bigboss0, User:Biggu_Bosu_Version_0 He seems to be using his user page as a web-page thing. Which is against the rules right? Conceredperson (talk) 01:41, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you "Conceredperson." I have blocked the user and deleted his user pages. either way (talk) 02:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

You're really starting to get on my nerves

Your constant reverts of my edits is why I started this RfC. The intent is for you to stop taking me in special regard. FMAFan1990 (talk) 20:20, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Just to let you know: "someone else did it first" and "the one user is anonymous" are not reasons to violate policy on Wikipedia like you've stated here. My intent is for you to stop making inappropriate edits on Wikipedia. either way (talk) 21:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, [[Sam Korn]] ^(smoddy) 08:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I am NOT a toy

Continuously reverting my edits makes me feel like a toy. I am not something you can just play with. So, I think you need to stop following me around. FMAFan1990 (talk) 22:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

and we all need you to stop adding random, unnecessary trivia to articles on here. either way (talk) 22:34, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Talk like that is why we can't have deletionists like you on here. I suggest you look at the top of my user page. FMAFan1990 (talk) 22:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a "deletionist" just a "we're not a random collection of trivia"ist. either way (talk) 22:39, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thank you for participating in my recent RfA, which was unable pass with a final tally of (45/39/9). I plan on addressing the concerns raised and working to improve in the next several months. Hopefully, if/when I have another RfA I will win your support. Special thanks go to MBisanz, GT5162, and MC10 for nominating me. Thanks again, -download ׀ sign! 01:22, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Only. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--(NGG) 11:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Assessment

Andrew Truxal has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. Renaissancee (talk) 20:24, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Plastic Noise Experience deletion

Sorry for a newbie question; but I don't see why this page was deleted more than most than lots of other Alfa Matrix bands, and I don't get where to look for the log for the proper reason. A bit like Leaether Strip they were signed as an old famous band... Jgc2003 (talk) 20:47, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

here's the entire text of the article from when I deleted it over 2 years ago:

Plastic Noise Experience is an industrial music band composed of Clause Kruse [Programming and voice] and S.M. Kalwa Programming and Lyrics].

The article doesn't show why the band is notable at all. either way (talk) 00:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Simple Wiki (from a month ago)

Reply to: According to Inferno, Lord of Penguins (see here), you suggested to him that a sockpuppeting user has been indefinitely blocked at English Wikipedia should go edit Simple Wikipedia to prove they are a good user. Please do not do this again. Simple Wikipedia is not a rehabilitation center for bad English users. We are not a test wiki where someone learns how to edit a real wiki. Please keep this in mind in the future, either way (talk) 14:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

This isn't the first time it's been done, and I'm certainly not the only administrator who has recommended this. I'll certainly keep it in mind in the future, but you may want to make this a little more well-known to other administrators as well. I apologize if there was any problem in this case, but as I mentioned, we have (successfully) done this in the past with other blocked or banned users. It's difficult to gauge their willingness to contribute when we're not willing to unblock them. Sorry for the long delay in getting back to you on this, I've been out for the past month. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

How would you know if it's successful or not though? Are you active on Simplewiki? Every banned user on enwiki who has come over to Simple has ended up being banned there too. I don't really call that successful. Majorly talk 16:45, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I can name only one EN banned user at Simple who is not banned, and they are inactive. Meetare Shappy ^Cunkelfratz! 16:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Transformers wars

You beat me to the protect button - I kept getting ec'd when I was trying to reply to them and couldn't get back to the article to do it. Soundwave (Transformers) and its cousins/brothers are other possible battlegrounds, and I'd appreciate a second set of eyes if you have time. Thanks! - KrakatoaKatie 23:21, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Seems to require a lot of patience. I think my favorite line of the dispute is "weve had it like that for days and to put thing up it has to have a source." Yet, nothing in there has a source right now and is just based on rumors. either way (talk) 23:24, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey there. I was wondering if you please unprotect the Blackout (Transformers) page. If someone starts an edit war then block THEM not the page. This way those of us who simply want to post some legitimate updates can update the page with current information. Mathewignash (talk) 19:21, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

The dispute has not been settled on the talk page. Once it has, then I will unprotect it (or let it expire on its own). either way (talk) 19:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

FBLA

the list of stuff should be included because one is trying to provide as much info possible on FBLA. It helps to clarify which states are in which region. Is Wikipedia not an Encyclopedia and all encyclopedias should include indepth information on each topic. I personally was interested in which states belonged to which region and i thought this should be shared. This article should shaped up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.73.17.220 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Extra long lists of states do not belong in an enyclopedia article. The article does not need to contain every single detail of the operations of FBLA-PBL. If we did, we'd have to have the name of every staff member, a description of what they did, a description of every competitive event, the voting procedures at NLC, the bylaws of the organization, etc. either way (talk) 11:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

i'm not saying putting all the details. As you have mentioned staff members and bylaws, yes they don't belong because they are variable each year. The lists of states is a constant for each region this is the only thing that needs to be added. I'm not trying to completely change the article I merely just wish to add relevant information that could be very useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.73.17.220 (talk • contribs)

A list of all the states in each region is not particularly "useful." What does it add to the understanding of what FBLA-PBL is? A reasonable assumption can be made about where each state falls in terms of regions. if anyone really wants to know where a particular state falls, they can look at the FBLA website. And, since the definitions of regions are defined in the bylaws, they can be variable as well (which you argued the bylaws are). either way (talk) 17:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Fine have it your way. I am not trying to be rude but I still strongly feel it is relevant to the point and some things don't change. Yes bylaws are variable but they are not just going to change something like the Regions, but if that is the way you feel can I at least provide a link to the National website for each region to clarify on that part. Could we come to an agreement on that, I get to link to the info instead and it doesn't affect the article. But my experiences as a High School student has given me reasonable assumption that many people can't make reasonable assumptions when it comes to certain things. Runesage106 (talk) 03:26, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Where would we put the links? And we don't have to link to every region. Like I said, it's in the bylaws, so only the bylaws would need to be linked to to show what states are in which region. either way (talk) 10:03, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

defiance

why was it deleted AcesUpMaSleeve (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Because it was a copyright violation. either way (talk) 18:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For drafting the hilarious "On retiring" essay with gave me a thorough chuckle, I hereby award you this barnstar. Nicely done! ThaddeusB (talk) 00:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to move this to the eassy's talk page if feel it is better placed there. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Why thank you! I've added it to the blank spot on my barnstars on my front page. Glad you got a chuckle out of it, either way (talk) 00:21, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

AcesUpMaSleeve

how is it its always you undoing what i do never anybody else its like your following or stalking me only online because its never another admin AcesUpMaSleeve (talk) 03:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't know. Stop making inappropriate edits and you should be okay. either way (talk) 10:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

i havent been making innapropriate edits AcesUpMaSleeve (talk) 18:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Dispute

their seems to be a dispute on Barricade (Transformers) could you help out ive warned both of them to stop but it doesnt seem to be happening and im not getting involved in another edit war its been going on for 2 days AcesUpMaSleeve (talk) 18:42, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I've protected the page. Once again, please settle this on the talk page. I agree with the IP, though. There is no room for "assumptions" on Wikipedia. Unless we have facts proven through sources, we can't include it in the article. The statement right now qualifies as original research and needs to be removed and kept out. either way (talk) 19:53, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

my name

I've seen people with their names colored in blue or red and so on... and I was wondering if you could tell me how to do it. Plz and thankyou The Movie Master 1 (talk) 03:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. I just keep my signature without colors and fonts. either way (talk) 09:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

See here. You'll need a limited knowledge of html if you want it really fancy. Majorly talk 09:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

With all due respect, sir...

The comments in question, as I stated in my last edit, were deleted under false pretenses. The user in question stated that the comments were a personal attack- they weren't - and considering that he and I are in a dispute the comments are precluded from being removed from the page. Don't tell me that he has the right to remove them as I've gotten in trouble plenty of times for removing comments from my page under similar circumstances. --ChrisP2K5 (talk) 03:40, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Whatever the pretense is, he has the right to remove it per WP:TALK guidelines. either way (talk) 03:43, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I just read the guidelines, and to my knowledge none of those apply to why he removed those comments. The man vandalized a page by continually insisting on adding unsourced data to the page and when he was prompted to provide information to back up his data he threatened said person who prompted him to do so and made a staunch refusal not to adhere to Wiki policy. He also claimed that what I said was a personal attack (it wasn't), slanderous (it wasn't), and also claimed that I was only going after him because of his condition. The mere fact that he wasn't blocked for an extended period of time (48 hours minimum) bothered me, and the fact that it was only a fifteen minute block for something that people have received indefinite blocks for is a little ludicrous. --ChrisP2K5 (talk) 04:23, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

The talk guidelines directly state "On your own user talk page, you may remove others' comments, although archiving is generally preferred." That applies to this situation. It is his talk page; he is allowed to remove your comments on his talk page. either way (talk) 04:26, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

They also state several other things, which apply to this situation directly. You don't get it, do you? He and I are in a dispute, and as such he is not allowed to remove the comments from his talk page. The rules cannot apply selectively. --ChrisP2K5 (talk) 04:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

the editor is wrong

The editor is abusing his power calling my edits vandalism when they clearly are not. What else am I supposed to do? Would you like to review everything that has been said. The the editor has the nerve to threaten me because I made a correction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonic43 (talk • contribs)

I don't care about the dispute. Just stop calling people idiots and being uncivil in general. Thanks, either way (talk) 04:51, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

An earlier suggestion?

Hey, we had a discussion a few weeks back where you were trying to make a point. I'm tr6ying very hard to get teh whole csd and deletion tags. Can you please let me know what you thought I was missing, you won't need specific examples but I am missing something. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Disruptive edits

Hi I need help IP user User talk:120.28.148.83 has kept being disruptive to the articles Arcee and Chromia he has kept adding false info that was long decided (by several users) shouldn't be there as it has no proper source (Arcee is one bike that seperates into 3 with one mind-hive mind) he has kept adding names for the seperate bikes (based on the toyline, that differs from the film as she is ONE mind not 3 bikes with a name each) despite my warnings and I need some one with Authority to help me out as he isn't listening to me. Please and thankyou. The Movie Master 1 (talk) 18:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Troublemaker1949

Do what you like, I don't give a shit Troublemaker1949 (talk) 16:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Pippo Berserk

He is the one who keeps putting up false info for Dakota Fanning and I have to keep undoing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Montana's Defender (talk • contribs)

Discuss those issues on the talk page or with him rather than constantly reverting each other or reporting him to AIV. Thanks, either way (talk) 19:49, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you can do that for me. But will try —Preceding unsigned comment added by Montana's Defender (talk • contribs)

I'm not involved in the dispute, so you'll have to talk to him about it. either way (talk) 19:53, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

My informations are true!!! You can check them.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pippo Berserk (talk • contribs)

Please talk about this at Talk:Dakota_Fanning#Dispute rather than on my talk page. It'd be a good idea to provide references for your information to show that they're true. either way (talk) 23:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

My informations are true!!! You can check them:

1. The name of Dakota Fanning's character in "Uptown girls" is "Lorraine Schleine" and not "Laraine Schlein".(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uptown_Girls)
2. Dakota Fanning gives her voice to Sydney's character in "Betsy's Kindergarten Adventures" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betsy%27s_Kindergarten_Adventures)
3. The title of the movie is "Fragments" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fragments_(film))
4. Dakota Fanning is a little girl with the balloon in the Rufus Wainwright's music video "Across the Universe" (www.youtube.com)

Ok, so waiting the informations about "Betsy's Kindergarten Adventures" cuold you at least please edit the others putting the right informations?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pippo Berserk (talk • contribs)

No, I want to see if others have any input on it first. either way (talk) 00:58, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

I have edited the right informations based on the results of the facts in dispute. You can check it.

Your hounding once again

Again, please stop hounding me. I know all about the policy regarding use of an editor's history, but when it leads to the editor being annoyed, then it has to stop. Admins have limits too, and I think it would be wise to follow them. FMAFan1990 (talk) 02:38, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

If you've read the guidelines, then you know what I'm doing is perfectly fine. There is a pattern of inappropriate edits from you, so using your edit history is quite appropriate here. either way (talk) 10:13, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Title change

Forgive the intrusion but, I've gone ahead and added the {{DISPLAYTITLE:pagename}} template on this page to match your current lower case signature. Just undo if you don't like it this way or if you do like it then consider adding the template to your user page :) hydnjo (talk) 23:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Johnny Test

Hey, check out my proposal to what we should do with the character article. [3]. Also it seems that warmpuppy2 is the one causing most of the problems. He's a good editor at times, but at times he pretends that he owns the articles and can do whatever he wants with them. For example he kept saying that the show used to be called "Jimmy Test", yet failed to provide sources. He kept putting it back many times after I've told him to put a source on it, but he never did. Also other cruft like "List of catch phrases" or "List of life lessons in episodes", stuff that does not belong in an encyclopedia. I remove them, and he keeps adding them for no reason. It's affecting all the Johnny Test articles, and I think you should also lock the other ones until we can get this under control. Heavydata (talk) 02:40, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry

Too quick off the mark I guess --Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Well

Deos the other guy at least get a warning for wrongly accusing me of vandalism? You cannot expect him to get away with this. And why am I getting a block warning. I am the victim here.--219.89.57.102 (talk) 04:51, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

No. You're being disruptive and you'll most likely be blocked for being a single-purpose account here. either way (talk) 04:52, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm disruptive? I was relevant in my first edit. He reverted without discussing with me first and then he accused me of vandalism. If he had just left the thread alone which he clearly did not know the stroy bhind, none of this would have happended,.--219.89.57.102 (talk) 04:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

He then had the nerve to revert and ignore my commetns on his talk page which i know he can do, but if you are going to warn someone blankly you should at least be open to discusing with them.