User talk:Tanthalas39/Archives/2010/January

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)

The December 2009 issue of the Military history 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.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:39, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Needless?

[[1]], how was this needless? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

A template warning? And multiple ones? Give me a break and stop antagonizing the user. I'm on your side in principle, but you're going on a crusade - seriously, please stop. Tan | 39 18:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

It wasn't my intention of going on a crusade. Just pointing out the only Personal attacks that have been made have been by him and appropriately warning him for it. If you think you can deal with it better by all means please do so. But comments like the above are attacks(,minor in the grand scheme of things) not the drivel he is claiming is. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Good god. Please, specifically point out where I attacked you. Tan | 39 18:26, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Not you Tan. He made the statement about me.[[[[2]], how was this needless? Hell In A Bucket]] I'm sorry if it came across that way. I believe it was the link I was refering to where he reffered to me only as a troublemaker. The only reason the warnings were left. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Hahah, okay - I was shaking my head in disbelief. I see what you are saying now. Regardless, I think even you can see that templated warnings against PA's - in the midst of a drama-laden discussion regarding personal attacks - is unproductive at best and baiting at worst. I'm not going to block anyone for being an idiot, so unless a specific behavior continues, I think we should all let it drop. Tan | 39 18:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

However you feel it should be handled is fine by me. The one request I make is that you go back and remove the reposted comment and deal with it. Templates sometimes are a wakeuip call but I can understand your logic, maybe try your way. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Was this useful?

Was this edit really useful? If a user comes to WP:AN/I looking for help, insults against his grasp of the language are not terribly helpful. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I replied on the ANI thread, as I completely disagree with your civility-police attitude. Tan | 39 00:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Block

On this fellow, whom you blocked: Tendentious editing, probably; exaggerated accusations, probably -- but there is a basis for the allegations (see Talk:Chilean people). Me, I'd have ticked him off and warned him of an impending block. -- Hoary (talk) 05:33, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, this was definitely borderline. If you want to unblock with a final warning, I'd be fine with that... Tan | 39 05:41, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the go-ahead. I've unblocked him. -- Hoary (talk) 06:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for the block on Coolerthenyou and the other one. Could you extend temporary IP protection to Chino High School? (I did file a request.) Thanks! Drmies (talk) 21:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

To all my TPSers

Question - anyone know where the "reward" section of Wiki is - where people pledge money in exchange for designated articles to be brought to a certain status? I'm on my work laptop; functionality is scarce. Tan | 39 02:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:BOUNTY perhaps? --Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 03:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

That's the one, thanks. Sadly, it doesn't seem to work - in the past four years, bounties have been collected on six article improvements. Tan | 39 03:20, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you should try the WP:Paid editing noticeboard instead? --Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 03:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet account

Hi Tan39, I have become increasingly concerned that a newly created user calling himself "Haipa dragoon" may be a sock puppet of the banned User:Dr90s. The first 3 edits made by this new user were extremely characteristic of Dr90s' normal edits including a reordering of the position of Shigeru Miyamoto to the lowest position for credit and a concern for game rankings. This edit didn't actually remove Miyamoto's name from the list of credits, and ultimately it actually served to restore a former consensus version of the page where directors were listed alphabetically. Nevertheless, I found the edit to be suspicious especially in light of the fact that the user's name is remarkably and confusingly similar to long-time video game article editor, User:Haipa Doragon (who seems to have gone on something of a wikibreak of late).

Since the first three edits, in less than 30 edits the new User:Haipa dragoon seems to have developed an amazingly extensive knowledge of wikipolicy and is currently engaged in a lengthy discussion concerning game rankings (one of Dr90s' pet interests). A review of User:Haipa dragoon's recent edits shows that a few days ago he edited the article on Shigeru Miyamoto to remove several games from the "gameography" section of the article on him. These edits are highly reminiscent of Dr90s' favorite edits.

On the other hand... There are some notable differences. User:Haipa dragoon is for the most part following the BRD discussion cycle. This is a considerable difference. His command of the English language also seems much better than it has been in the past, although there are still a few rough spots (e.g. "Ok I do not remove the sentence until the discussion is over. I just add some information").

I'm not sure what you're allowed to do to further investigate the matter. If the underlying IP can be traced to somewhere outside of Japan then this would be a good indication that it is NOT Dr90s. At any rate, I just wanted to give you a heads up as you'd agreed to be the go-to admin for the sockpuppets of Dr90s. I'm still not 100% positive it's him, so at this time I'm making no official recommendation. Anyway let me know what you think. Am I being overly paranoid? -Thibbs (talk) 06:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Against my better judgment, I have become involved in a discussion with this new editor at Talk:Shigeru Miyamoto#Obvious vandalism by Thibbs. I only bring this up in the interest of transparency as I have become an "involved editor."

From these discussions, however, I think it's relevant that the user took an immediate and powerful dislike of me (as noticed by his rhetoric). I know I'm not necessarily the most lovable of editors, but certainly this kind of reaction is a bit strange and makes me wonder if he's already had trouble from me in the past. Secondly, on this editor's prompting I took a look at the history of the article relating to the content-based discussion we were having. I find that the edit this user wishes to make is identical to the same edit made 3 times by Dr90s in the past and reverted as vandalistic 3 times. Dr90s has been the only editor to make this particular edit in the past, and Dr90s had employed the same rationale each time.

I hesitate to make any accusation since the editor has only made a few edits and I generally try to abide by WP:BITE. I am also, as I noted above, an "involved editor" due to my content-based discussion with him. I may appear to be biased. Do you have any thoughts on the matter? From a neutral 3rd-person perspective does this appear suspicious? -Thibbs (talk) 23:44, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Total misinterpretation

Yeah... I really don't feel the need to "badge polish" on WT:RFA; anyone that's a regular knows that I'm a bureaucrat. I only drew the distinction because some people do think that bureaucrats have additional authority in RfA matters, despite the fact that you and I are in agreement that, in damn near every instance, they do not. EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Replied at the talk page, as you've no doubt seen. While I vehemently disagree with Franamax's assessment that bureaucrats can somehow post official positions or that their opinions "carry more weight", I would like to say that my statements to you were casual. I do think that you kept bringing up your extra button when you didn't really need to (you could have just stated your opinion, rather than essentially stating, "I'm a 'crat, but not for this sentence...") Anyway, no hard feelings on my end. Tan | 39 04:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Eh, I only brought it up once (the first "official" comment was more in a historical context), but since we're pretty much in agreement that 'crats don't hold special authority... I really don't know how to end the sentence, other than just go "groovy" and move on. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Boss. ;-) Tan | 39 04:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Justin Bieber

Hi. I see that you put the protection on the talk page for the Justin Bieber page. I wanted to leave a message there about a couple of edits that are needed, so I hope it is ok if I leave them here instead. In the intro section it says "This accomplishment made Bieber the only artist in Billboard history to have four singles from a debut album chart in the Top 40 of the Hot 100 before the album's release." The citation provided says that he is the only SOLO artist to do this, not the only artist. Two sentences later it says "Bieber also became the first artist to have all songs from a single album to chart in the U.S. Hot 100." The citation confirms that all songs charted, but says nothing about him being the FIRST to do this. If you could make the changes that would be great. Thanks. 99.192.89.68 (talk) 05:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Changes made, please check my work. Thanks! Tan | 39 15:16, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. Thanks. 142.177.27.56 (talk) 16:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Me again. It seems that Candyo32 reverted the changes you made that I asked about. I left a note on his/her talk page to ask for a re-revert. He/She has made numerous edits since then, but neither replied to my note nor switched this one back. If you could help (again!) I would appreciate it. 99.192.89.217 (talk) 02:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Any reason you don't just make an account? Tan | 39 20:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Greek Basketball

Question for you...why did you block his talk page? This might be WGB's only line to tell us he is OK. I think we should leave that open for discussions between him and others. I don't think we should make the situation worse by cutting off contact with an already distressed individual. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 16:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Did you read the link I posted, WP:SUICIDE? It is not our responsibility - and legally, we most definitely don't want it to be - to council, help, provide therapy for, or otherwise address this user's suicidal threat. Tan | 39 17:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I actually haven't read the entire thing, no. I just think that, while yes, counseling or helping is out, I think we should leave access for WGB to say "Hey, everything is fine". I don't think we should cut off the only contact he has. I am looking at this from the user's (WGB) perspective, not the other editors. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 17:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

He is welcome to use the email option. Tan | 39 17:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, I have read the part of WP:SUICIDE you were refering to and now understand. Sorry for the confusion. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 17:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Would it have been preferable to uncheck the "Allow this user to edit own talk page while blocked" box rather than protecting the page? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Not in my opinion. The purpose is to completely disengage the community from the threat and vice-versa; I don't want random people chiming in for various reasons while WSG isn't allowed to reply. Tan | 39 17:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Zenne, another Wikipéire sock targeting Iceland (supermarket).

Just hours after your semi-protection expired, Iceland (supermarket) is being targeted by a "new user", Zenne, changing Republic of Ireland to Ireland. As you can see this is perfectly timed by Wikipéire and Zenne points out wiki policy like he/she is an established user, even the account is only an hour old as of now. Can you deal with it? Regards, Footyfanatic3000 ^{(talk  · contribs)} 21:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Please see my response on another talk page here. As a former ip editor I feel the above user doesn't like the policy regarding the edit and is looking for an excuse to ignore and have their Pov. The consensus on this edit is clear and it should be kept dispite this editors best efforts in order to retain the standards if Wikipedia in keeping it in a Npov.

I'm reverting this user's edits only because he/she is a banned user, not because I don't like wiki policy. All of Wikipéire's socks have lied like this. --Footyfanatic3000 ^{(talk  · contribs)} 21:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

It's alright, SirFozzie has now banned the user. --Footyfanatic3000 ^{(talk  · contribs)} 22:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Saturday

Saturday (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

The user is requesting what the hell is going on, and other choice words. I attempted to bluntly explain what was going on, while avoiding expletives, but I would feel better if someone of higher status did so. Thank you for your time.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 00:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I would just ignore him, no reason to pay any attention. Tan | 39 00:12, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Crotchety

Ha, I can't believe he brought up this diff, and tells me that I can't read, when you are quite clearly responding to a user whose name is Crotchety.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 01:41, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Silverlife

Can you delete the images also? Joe Chill (talk) 00:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Heads up, I believe our friend is using a anon ip to readd his content.[[3]] Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi

How dare you? try to delete my words.

Are you Libra, Gemini or some haters else?

The picture on the "front page" was so show-off. Silverlife (talk) 16:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, you will not be allowed to have those boxes on your userpage. Tan | 39 17:09, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Heads up [[4]] Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:10, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppet of Coolguy101011

Coolguy101012 is clearly the user Coolguy101011 who you just blocked. Will this require a SPI or can you do an ip block?

"Please inform user"

Hi, Tan! I've noticed that more than once, you've left messages such as the above (most recently here – would it be possible for you to just leave {{ANI-notice}} yourself in such cases, in the spirit of SOFIXIT and BOLD? It would take precisely the same amount of time as it took you to leave the "please inform" request in the first place... just seems a bit of a waste otherwise. Thanks! ╟─TreasuryTag►assemblyman─╢ 19:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Nope. Tan | 39 19:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, it's a pity you don't want to help the project's smooth running in this way, but your call. ╟─TreasuryTag►Captain-Regent─╢ 19:26, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Listen, don't bother showing up here being condescending, cool? It wastes both our time, and as the apparent Time Wasting Policeman of Wikipedia, you wouldn't want that. Tan | 39 19:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Are you ok Tan? Most of the time I've seen you here you are levelheaded. One of the better admin on the project from what I've seen. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 19:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Tanthalas39/Archives/2010. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ╟─TreasuryTag►without portfolio─╢ 19:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. Now, unless you have anything pertinent to say to me, please stay off my talk page. Tan | 39 19:38, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

This whole thread gave me a good chuckle. Thanks for being Tan, Tan.  :-) What a ridiculous misuse of WQA, Treasury. LOL. Keeper | 76 16:53, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that WQA proceeded just about as I expected. Tan | 39 17:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Was yesterday a bad day? I asked but you seemed a bit riled so I didn't press the issue. I hope today is a better one! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Yesterday was a perfectly fine day. Tan | 39 17:24, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok then, just checking on you. Have a good one Tan. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I think Tan was taking a page from the "teach a man to fish" school. –xeno^talk 17:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries

I disagree with your position, but understand and respect it. No one "owes" me their support, and I appreciate you pulling out rather than opposing. When I made my comment there, I hadn't realized you'd struck your support, so it wasn't directed at you. As far as I'm concerned, we're cool. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:59, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I fully understand your position Tan, and thank you for not opposing Flo. Pedro :  Chat  20:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Not a barn

		The Original Barnstar
		For the very clear and concise message seen here, I award you this barnstar! :) - NeutralHomer • Talk • 18:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

*drums fingers* Hmmmmm

Let's think of ways to bring Keeper out of retirement, or maybe you could "help" me instead of him? Dusti^SPEAK!! 22:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Keeper is participating in this project at his desired level right now. As to helping you (I assume in a mentor or coach sort of way), I just don't have the time or patience for that sort of thing. Sorry! Tan | 39 16:54, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

MisterWiki

calling admins who don't let him off for his article contributions Nazi's, now. Fun. Ironholds (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Was about to come and say the same, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 23:40, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Good thing I don't take offense very easily. :-) Tan | 39 23:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Well Done

		The Outlaw Halo Award
		The following is only half sarcastic: For cutting through the crap (literally) when dealing with Mr Wiki. (And breaking WP:CIVIL in the process) NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 23:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC) (about the award)

Discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Pinball

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Pinball. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 16:10, 18 January 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

Note..

One of the reasons I used the "until" on the two soccer articles is because rather than protect for a number of days, I used the "until" option instead, due to the important date being Feb 1 ... I think my first protection I stated "3 days" because I had used the 3 days. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, that makes sense. Like saying "until after the election" or similar. Carry on :-) Tan | 39 18:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

'Tis been a busy first day ... closing AfD's, RFPP, Unblock requests, CSD's ... little time for WP:ANI LOL. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, don't you worry. Close enough AfDs, field enough unblock requests, and delete enough CSD articles... and you'll find yourself the subject of an ANI thread before the day is out. Tan | 39 18:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Cheers Tan

Thanks for blocking the hoaxer. Sorry for posting the email in the heat of the moment and complicating what should have been a straight forward issue. I should have thought twice. Polargeo (talk) 17:32, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I figured since I blanked it and reported to Oversight, I am allowed to say that I, for one, accept your apology. I've posted e-mails myself without knowing about the rules (though, admittedly, they contained no personal information and were to my talk page not AN/I). Everyone makes mistakes. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 17:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Next time, maybe think before the "I am right" sort of thing - you really weren't ;-) Tan | 39 17:55, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Mbz1 talk page

Hi Tanthalas, I don't want to get into an edit war with you over this, but please leave Mbz1's talk page as she left it. Given her threat yesterday, I think that this user is likely to be in an unhappy frame of mind, and that it's not a good idea to antagonize her by deleting her user page. I think that all users named on this page can probably deal with the personal attacks that it contains. While some of the comments directed at other users are indeed uncivil, the comments directed at Mbz1 that provoked these remarks were uncivil too! I feel strongly that leaving her user page as it is would be the best way to keep this situation calm at this point. I don't think anyone is seriously hurt by the page as it is, and I'm concerned that blanking the page will further upset Mbz1. Best, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 15:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Taken to ANI. The fact that they are in an "unhappy frame of mind" is irrelevant - they are not allowed to attack other editors while being pissed themselves. Tan | 39 15:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Good lord, does this really need to go to ANI again? I think that this is a bad, bad idea, given the result of the last ANI discussion; please everyone, calm down! CordeliaNaismith (talk) 15:40, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm three seconds from blocking them, tossing the key, and forgetting they ever existed. I will not give this user a free pass to attack other editors, no matter what "frame of mind" they are in. Tan | 39 15:41, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Tan, what is your goal here? Please think about what path of action is most likely to help the encyclopedia. I think it would be absolutely inappropriate for you to block this user at this point. It is my personal opinion that a user who left a note like the one left the other day should be treated very, very gently. Also please be aware that User:Mbz1 has made many excellent contributions to Wikipedia in the past. In particular, she is a fantastic photographer, and has contributed many featured photos. Even if her comments bother you, please try to think about how other users are likely to respond to your actions. CordeliaNaismith (talk) 15:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

My goal is to remove obvious personal attacks from the project. Take it to ANI if you have further comment, please. We are not here to provide therapy for Wikipedians. Tan | 39 15:47, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

ANI thread notice

There is a new thread on WP:ANI that you might be interested in. Tan | 39 15:38, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I could not respond your message at my talk page because it is protected, but I would like to thank you for your post on AN/I and at my talk page. I am not going to comment at AN/I. I have said about everything that there were to say at my own user page. If you'd rather delete the message I have left at your talk page please fill absolutely free to do so. Warm regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

And I absolutely agree with you that I should not be threaded any differently "simply because I have provided quality pictures in the past". It would be very wrong, if I was. From now on I will stay out of your talk page. Warm regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I never asked you to stay off my talk page, for the record. Tan | 39 16:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

After I read this, which I consider yet another good example of bullying, (I read it only today, that's why a late response) I'd like to ask you to remove your "courtesy" from my talk page. You should have had a courtesy to unprotected my talk page before you left a message there. Then I would have been able to remove it myself. I would not like my talk page to contain a signature of a bully administrator. Warm regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:59, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll remove it. Believe you me; I only left it there because I was required to per ANI rules. I had no real wish to communicate directly with someone who uses their user page to attack other editors. Also, you might want to remove the "warm regards" part of your signature when you have no actual desire for warm regards. Tan | 39 13:49, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I do wish you warm regard, Tan. I am not angry with you, at all. I was only hurt by the message you left at the other user talk page. That's it. Nothing what I have wrote for the last 3 days was written out of anger. It was written only because I was hurt, desperate, and hopeless. I've already provided the example from "My Fair Lady" at the other user pages, but in case you have not seen it, I would like to repeat it please:
Remember the scene, when Professor Henry Higgins, Colonel Hugh Pickering and Eliza Doolittle came home after triumph at the reception? Professor Henry Higgins and Colonel Hugh Pickering started to congratulate each-other, but completely forgot about Eliza. She got very upset, and later told Professor Henry Higgins: "I wish I was dead". Then she left, and met Freddy Eynsford-Hill. He asked her, where she was going? She said she was going to the river. He asked her why, and she responded "to make a hole in it." What reasons did Eliza have to wish to be dead, to make a hole in a river? Was she angry? No, she was upset because she did not know what is going to happen to her now, when the "experiment" has ended.
Please try to understand me. Quite a few editors, who say they retire continue to edit as usual. Ever since I said I retired, I have not edited a single article, I only edited my own user page, and pages of few other people. All my edits were directly related to my retirement, and besides even, if I wanted to un-retire, I have no place to ask for it. All my user pages are protected :)
No matter what, I remember good things about you. I remember how, when I asked to be blocked, and you did block me, you've got yourself in many troubles because of that, and I am still sorry I dragged you into that. I remember how I then asked you to unblock me, and you did at once without asking for any explanations at all. It was really nice of you!
I wish you tried to understand my actions now too. I do not ask you to accept them, just to try to understand. For example, you called what I wrote at my user page "a page-long rant full of personal attacks" , but it was mostly the text that I copied from AN/I (it lasted for 5+ hours!) That's why it was a "page-long". Also I know that you considered "robot" comment I made an attack (in the country I am from, it would not have been such a big deal at all, I assure you), but were there any other "new" attacks, I mean not the ones that I copied from AN/I? I would really appreciate your response on that question, if you have a time of course. Sorry for the long message, please feel absolutely free to ignore and delete it, and no matter what, warm regards :) --Mbz1 (talk) 15:21, 29 January 2010 (UTC)