Jump to content

User talk:Wikibofh/Archive5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

-sprotection of the van Leeuwenhoek article

[edit]

Dear Wikibofh, I noticed today that you have removed sprotection from the Anton_van_Leeuwenhoek article. When this was first applied on 4/21/06, it was requested, and by implication agreed to, that the sprotection would last one month. Over the course of the last four months, the article has been repeatedly vandalized once every two or three days on an average. Is it possible that you might be able to leave sprotection here until 5/21/06? Thanks,

-Scott P. 18:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • The standard is not to semi for more than a week, but it doesn't appear to be policy. Tell you what, if it starts getting vandalized again, let me know and I'll re-semi as soon as I get the message. I'll also add it to my watchlist. Is that acceptable? Wikibofh(talk) 20:23, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sure...can't guarantee we'll get it, but I'll make sure I put that comment in the sprotect. The problem is without digging into the request, you never see 30 days mentioned (not in the article talk for instance). Wikibofh(talk) 23:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sounds good to me. This was my first request for sprotection, so next time I'll make sure that if the request is for a longer period than one week, that it gets discussed on the article talk page. Meanwhile we can certainly wait and see whether or not the vandal will need a longer protection period to cool his heels.  : ) Thanks again, -Scott P. 00:21, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

48 hours?

[edit]

What's up with the 48 hour block for a 3RR violation? [1] I quote WP:3RR:

"If you violate the three-revert rule, after your fourth revert in 24 hours, sysops may block you for up to 24 hours. In the cases where multiple parties violate the rule, administrators should treat all sides equally." (emphasis added)

Cheers! —BorgHunter ubx (talk) 15:38, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is verifiable to you?

[edit]

Re: Your rediting of New Belgium Breweries website.

Wikibofh,

What is verifiable to you? Anything that is written on a corporations web site? If only New Belgium would provide some verification of their claims, we would not be having this discussion. But they won't. In a pattern of behavior resembling the Bush administrations aproach to going to war (with us or against us) the company refuses any validation of their claims.

Using your standards anything a corporation wants to portray to the public is gospel as long as it appears on a corporation controlled website. If you would like evidence that NB falsifies information it provides to the public I would be happy to provide it. If ou want proof that they have no intention of being completely wind powered, I can provide that to you as well.

What's next for you, defending Shell Oil in the Niger Delta? Newmont Mining in South East Asia and Indonesia? They have lots of material for you to use on their corporate website.

Until you can verify using some independent source how much energy New Belgium uses from renewable sources, I will continue to post my factual information. I will give it a rest for a couple of days so that you can get back to me with some verifiable figures. Don't forget to let me know if you would like some proof of their lies. Post here or on the discussion for NB article.

Sutherix —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.127.188 (talk • contribs) 19:44, April 29, 2006

What constitutes an intermediate perl programmer?

[edit]

What is the definition of an intermediate perl programmer? I know how to use a hash of hashes and an array of arrays. I can use references and know how to dereference. In that case, what should I place on my user page?

One perl question I do have is the following. If within a subroutine I had the following: 

sub foo{
   my %header_hash;

   $header_hash{"Allen"} = "Chang";
   $header_hash{"Wiki"} = "bofh";

   return \%header_hash;
}

Although it would seem that "my" limits the scope of the hash data structure to within the subroutine, I know that one could access the data structure outside the subroutine through the reference. In the case, what's the real scope of the hash data structure? Is it really a global variable and is the "my" statement not effective at all?! Allentchang 14:52, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not sure what counts. I just know I'm pretty good at it, but don't want to tempt the fates with the Advanced tag.  :) I'll have to look up the details (my books are packed as I transition jobs) but it's an interesting question. My guess is as follows: The scope is limited by the my. You can no longer directly access that array once you leave the subroutine. However, since you have a reference to it, it prevents the garbage collector from reaping it and you can still access it via reference. If you had not passed the reference out, it would be garbage collected and truly no longer available. I'll keep this here and look it up (it's probably in the Panther book) in a few weeks. Wikibofh(talk) 15:58, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow...forgot about this. Turns out I was right, it's about referencing. The advantage is that you're guaranteed within the subroutine to get something of local scope if you my it, even if it had a global scope before. Wikibofh(talk) 22:24, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotecting

[edit]

Hi Wikibof, when you unprotect a page in future, could you remember please to remove its listing, if it has one, from WP:PP? Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 09:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I try. I've been going through the category, and I spent some time last night going back through the listings to clean those up. I'll try to be better about it.  :) Wikibofh(talk) 14:07, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Kelves

[edit]

You seemed to block him. Check out my talk page for a list of more of his socks. I'd block him my self, but I'm not quite sure what information you were using to indef block. Pepsidrinka 03:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why Can I Not Delete Osama bin Ladin

[edit]

This page is horendus. Why can I not nominate it for deletion!--216.7.248.254 18:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is a perfectly good article on a subject that deserves treatment in an encyclopedia. There is no way to argue that he is not notable. If you don't like the article, then feel free to improve it, but AfD is not an option for that, and your use of it looks a lot like WP:POINT Wikibofh(talk) 20:05, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Monster Truck cleanup

[edit]

I am beginning (or at least trying to begin) the process of cleaning up the entire Monster truck section and could use your help/input. I nominated a bunch of trucks for AFD here (I'd like to add McGruff to that list since it's not nearly as notable as the other trucks), I also tried to establish some basic guidelines for monster truck notability. Anything you can suggest/help with would be great. Arenacale 05:25, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:216.56.4.194

[edit]

Wikibofh, Just a quick thank you for enforcing a longer block for this particular editor. I appreciate your immediate attention to this matter. --Ataricodfish 16:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taipei American School

[edit]

Would it be possible to use sprotected rather than vprotected to protect the page about Taipei American School? That is, we prohibit new users and anonymous users from doing anything.

Taipei American School, like any other learning institution, has always had weird politics. For confidentiality reasons, I can't describe the politics that occured in the early 1990's, but no matter how passionately good or bad things may have seemed to certain people, everything turned ok in the end. Unless one can prove that the recent events has without a doubt permanent consequencies to the school, one should not spill a monthly update of school politics on the Wikipedia. The Wikipedia is an encyclopedia: not a blog. Allentchang 01:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added Taipei American School photos

[edit]

Hi,

I've added several photos that better illustrate the school's facilities. Hope it will let you see more of the school that you've read about but never ever been to. Allentchang 14:27, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the WikiProject Arizona!!!

[edit]

I really appreciate you joining in. Anything you can do to get the project on its feet will be appreciated. Best, Kukini 00:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering...

[edit]

Why did you delete my comments on the Frisbee Throws Page? If you took them off for a reason, i just want to know, because i am just trying to help people learn how to throw, and i was responding to a question a lot of people ask me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.46.35 (talk • contribs) 00:32, June 6, 2006

  • I presume you're User:Popfighter2. I got rid of your comments because they weren't encyclopedic, weren't well formatted, and were signed. They looked like something intended for the talk page (this is the diff. Your statements are correct, but it's how to format them into the article that is problematic. Wikibofh(talk) 01:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how else to respond

[edit]

Anyway, it is popfighter2 sorry i didn't sign it. I will figure out how to format a little better than repost. Thanks for the corrections.

Shorter spoken word articles

[edit]

Howdy, saw your post. Like Laura said, you should just pick something that interests you. There tends to be a demand for any tech-related topics. I just completed Central Processinging Unit; maybe pick a shorter article that links there, and do a test run? Aguerriero (talk) 02:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've recorded Dennis Ritchie about 5 times now and screwed it up different ways.  :) That will probably be the first one I end up finishing. It was just a bit intimidating to go through "Requested Articles" and find that all of them were FA.  :) Wikibofh(talk) 02:15, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Ritchie

[edit]

I'll give editing a shot if you upload the original of the recording. ~MDD4696 15:44, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and a quick note on pronunciation: GNU is pronounced "guh-new", not "new" :). ~MDD4696 15:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know. It's a pronunciation foible. Let's just agree not to argue about Linux.  :) I'll try to make sure I fix it.  :) Wikibofh(talk) 15:57, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • The noise is pretty bad in Image:Dennis Ritchie 2.ogg... you did a good job of reducing it yourself. Do you know the source of the noise? If you can fix the problem, I would suggest re-recording it. ~MDD4696 18:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • That was a the file with no attempt at processing. I left the empty spaces in so that you could use them for noise removal if you wanted. I was also trying to upload the original Audacity project somwhere. Would that be useful?
    I think they noise artifact I'm hearing is from normalization. I don't know where else the noise could really be from unless it's microphone placement. I guess I'll have to experiment with that, although since it's attached to the headphones I'm not sure how much I can do. Wikibofh(talk) 21:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • The Audacity project wouldn't really be helpful. The second recording was the unprocessed one, right? Normalization doesn't introduce noise... basically it amplifies a signal to a certain threshold. The noise in the recording didn't sound like actual background noise; I'd suggest testing your connections and cables. Perhaps it is something inside of the headset itself? ~MDD4696 02:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No noise, certainly an improvement! However, I believe you placed the microphone too closely to your mouth (the Sibilant consonants are rather strong), unless the "breathy" sounds are from noise removal somehow. I think the recording is good enough for now, but if you eventually re-record it, try placing the microphone to the side of your mouth, not immediately in front of it. ~MDD4696 02:13, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The microphone is almost directly in contact with my mouth, but to the side. Damned if I do, damned if I don't.  :) I'm going to have to determine this microphone/headset combo and add it to the "not recommended" cateogry.  :) I'm also working on a much larger article, so hopefully it will be good enough. Wikibofh(talk) 03:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:IPs

[edit]

You misunderstood my comment. I was saying that the IP address that I "use" is not up to me. I am not technically resourceful and have not been misleading on this point. He has repeatedly attempted a poor slur that I am willfully changing my IP. I am not complaining about the fact that I have a dynamic IP, I am complaining about his deliberate misrepresentation of what it means to have a dynamic IP.

Furthermore, registered users are allowed to edit anonymously. This is not an issue, and not the issue here. I hope this clarifies my remark. Thanks for your time. 141.153.114.88 01:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

141.153.114.88 is actively involved in many large disputes with constantly changing dynamic IP addresses which causes much confusion among editors, as evidenced by this talk page. I believe that the multiple IP addresses are counterproductive to consensus and allow 141.153.114.88 to escape accountability, as other editors cannot keep track of his overall contributions and warnings on his talk page, as his IP address constantly changes everyday. --RevolverOcelotX 02:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On the mentioned talk page there are several instances of him attempting to divert attempted content resolution comments into this issue, whereas you will not find a single instance of policy violation or identity misrepresentation by myself. He simply repeats accusations in the hopes that they stick onto somebody, somewhere. 141.153.114.88 02:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • To 141, I offer the following: You are correct that you don't have to register, and there should not be a stigma. I was just pointing out that it didn't HAVE to be that way. DHCP is not a crime. Failing to registering is not a crime. To Revolver, I understand your frustration, but understand that he is probably correct. He gets a new IP address. Research DHCP. My point is that it was beyond simple WP:AIV. Wikibofh(talk) 02:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibofh, I understand that he doesn't have to register. My complaint on WP:AIV was that 141.153.114.88 was continually re-inserting old comments, which I already responded to, on my talk page. --RevolverOcelotX 02:11, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

You keep on removing my indeed commercial links. But you keep tons of commercial links in the same pages. Because of this, I include my links NOT TO PROMOTE but TO PROTECT my sites. I like wikipedia not to be a vehicle of advertising, but you have turn it into a vehicle of promoting the business you want. I expect you to remove other's commercial links who use wikipedia to promote their own sites and ruin my own business or accept mine too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.92.70.51 (talk • contribs) 11:16, June 22, 2006

  • I remove most commercial links I find. However, I'm not active in going into the article and finding them, but I do check them when they are added. I am not sympathetic to the "protecting my sites" argument. Instead, just remove the other commercial links with an appropriate edit summary. Wikibofh(talk) 14:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have removed my links about 30 times, but you never saw that the "official link" for Tinos links to a Travel Agency. Sure.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.92.70.51 (talk • contribs) 08:12, June 23, 2006

oops...

[edit]

OOPS, I'm sorry to say that about the 3RR violation posting; should've watched better... --Bigtop (customer service - thank you for your cooperation.) 17:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's no big deal.  :) If you look at history we both did it in the same minute. I just wanted you to know so that it didn't look like I was just deleting your comments, which is normally frowned upon. Wikibofh(talk) 17:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:71.124.114.26's vandalism

[edit]

71.124.114.26 (talk · contribs) has continually vandalize my user talk page and has clearly broken the 3RR TWICE, once on his user talk page, and once on my user talk page. Where should I report 71.124.114.26 (talk · contribs) if not on WP:AIV? Thanks --RevolverOcelotX 18:18, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

      • Yes, you should report it again. However, the reason you probably didn't get it the first time is the same as mine, a reluctance to jump into an edit war on talk pages. Your report was fine, but I'd suggest looking at my (newly created) recommendations for 3RR reports. My recommendation for your talk page is to create an archive and move everything there. Wikibofh(talk) 19:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • I moved your report to the bottom of the page, where new reports typically go. It probably would not have been looked at next to the other one in the middle of the page. Wikibofh(talk) 19:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked user is back

[edit]

User:RogerMooreArm who was banned has respawned this time as User:Lifer00. He's been repeatedly vandalising Turkey, History of the Turkish people with his blatantly POV edits on Turkey's history for some time now. First it was as an anon; now he keeps registering new user accounts. Can you take any action over this guy ? Thanks--KSK 05:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

possible Block evasion

[edit]

See my comment on 3rr page

Lifer00 (talk · contribs) is editing (revert waring) in an identical manner to User:RogerMooreArm whom you have recently blocked for a 3rr violation. A checkuser might be premature in my opinion though it wouldnt hurt either. --Cat out 05:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Repeat Spammer

[edit]

You removed my WP:AIV post on User:64.16.16.210 without action or comment. I can only assume that you wanted an additional Last Warning on the user's Talk page? Multiple Last Warnings always look kinda weird to me, but if that's what it takes... Please let me know, though-- I'm not real fond of going to the trouble of putting AIV notices up to no effect, so I would sincerely like to know what alternative course of action I should be taking. TIA, -- Mwanner | Talk 17:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I know what your talking about, but what we need is a recent last warning.  :) Normally, I'm not a stickler on that, if they've gotten it in the last few days I'm ok with it. The problem with that one is that it was April 10th. A warning from 2.5 months ago seems much too long. The other times I will ignore it completely are when they have the "repeat vandal" tag, or if they have been blocked a lot of times. This IP has never been blocked. Make sense? So, give them test4, and if they vandalize again, post to AIV and they'll probably get a short block and if they keep doing it, the blocks get longer. Wikibofh(talk) 17:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK. Thing is, though, this guy is, in my experience, an example of a fairly typical pattern for some spammers-- he did a burst of spamming on December 19, Feb 2, March 27, and then today, with the odd bit thrown in on other widely scattered days. At this rate, he'll accumulate a whole lot of "Last Warnings" before he ever gets blocked. I'll add a new "Last Warning", but I frankly don't see it doing much good. -- Mwanner | Talk 20:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yep, I know what you're saying. They stop by every few months do a few and disappear. The problem is that policy says we're not supposed to block an IP for more than a month (I have done far more than that on some that are really bad) but even if I blocked him for a month, we'd be at the same place. Indefinite blocks are reserved for extreme cases. Wikibofh(talk) 21:15, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • OK, I see your point-- I guess in effect I am asking for a multi-month block minimum, and it's certainly true that this guy is far smaller potatoes than many others. Thanks for the clarification. Cheers! -- Mwanner | Talk 23:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Armking

[edit]

Was this block really necessary? He had already stopped creating circular references after his first and final warning (also a bit crude because no attempt at communication was done), and I think WP:AGF would be in order here. Errabee 23:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • What possible good faith reason could there be for circular redirect? Also, what newbie would come on and first start doing them? The sandbox, I can understand. I few misc vandalisms I can understanrd. But circular redirects (or page moves) show that they are familiar with mediawiki and just don't care. All that being said, if you want to take this to WP:ANI for review, I have no objections (and won't view it as a hostile move.) Wikibofh(talk) 01:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:210.8.54.35

[edit]

I just thought I should let you know that I blocked this IP again. This time for one month. Good luck with the school. Sometime I can get schools to listen and other times I am just ignored. -- Psy guy Talk 02:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block of JediMasterHunter

[edit]

He also seems to be using this IP 195.93.21.73 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and it might be worth a block so that the AFD notice can stay in place. --Crossmr 16:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

which he's also using for personal attacks on my user page [3]--Crossmr 16:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • That is AOL, so a pain to block. I've blocked that IP range for 15 minutes to limit the number of legit editors we hit. You'll just have to watch and find an admin online. Sorry. Wikibofh(talk) 17:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

148.177.1.213

[edit]

I'm curious about a recent vandalism warning you placed at User talk:148.177.1.213 today. I didn't make the edits from that IP (but any edits I make may or may not be attributed to that IP depending on which proxy it goes through), but it seems to me that they were not vandalism. The editior was simply removing redundant categories. In any case, a {{test4}} warning seems excessive even if it was vandalism considering it would be the first such incident from the shared IP in a month or so. So if you don't mind removing (or at least toning down that warning) I would appreciate it, because it may cause the IP to get blocked and there are at least several registered editors that would be affected. Thanks. 148.177.1.213 18:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • One edit from an IP removing categories without explanation. If you'll look, the message just about that was spam-2. Last non-rolled back change was a change to solvents that looked odd too. That's why. Wikibofh(talk) 18:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • The removal of categories was justified - it was not vandalism. Articles should not be categorized in both a category and one of its subcategories. The edit to solvent is accurate as well. The "final warning" you gave was not appropriate. Please remove it. 148.177.1.212 18:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree it was justified, or I would have reverted all of the others that happened when it looks like you logged in. I will happily remove it, but please, be nice and cite the solvent change. Wikibofh(talk) 18:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you. I apologize if I don't come across as civil (I tried to use "thanks" and "please".) And just to avoid mistaken identities, I am not the same user that logged in and made more of the category changes. 148.177.1.213 18:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the <ref> on Chesty Puller

[edit]

After finding the 7th Marines reference, I was doing a little more searching; came back to add the reference to the article, and you'd beat me to it. Thanks.

If you have an interest in USMC articles, there are some to-dos listed on the Marine Corps Portal.

— ERcheck (talk) @ 23:56, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • My pleasure. I don't have a lot of interest in the Marine articles, but was just thinking about articles that I'm proud of as a wikipedian, and you had a big hand in one of the three.. I created Roy M. Davenport when searching to see if Chesty was the only 5 time recipient of the Navy Cross. It was just a stub, but it seemed like he should have an article. Now, it's all grown up, in no small part to your efforts. Thank you. I especially appreciate you finding references and adding appreciable content. Wikibofh(talk) 00:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC) (for the record, the other two are Elwood Mead and Gas lighting, I didn't say they were great article, but for some reason they appeal to me.)[reply]
    • I checked out the other two articles... enjoyable reading. It's great to see such diverse topics covered and to learn something new everyday. — ERcheck (talk) @ 01:16, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for the edits!  :) Mead was another one where I saw a red link and thought "How can we not have an article on who it was named after?" Gas lighting was something entirely different.  :) IMO, my only really significant contribution to military matters has been the spoken word version of World War I. You have no idea how many problems you find with an article when you try to record a version of it.  :) Wikibofh(talk) 01:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some sticky situations

[edit]

A mediation is being help on the IRC channel [irc://irc.freenode.net/Wikipedia-medcab #wikipedia-medcab0, involving Giovanni33, a user you have recently blocked. Just thought you'd like to know. --The Prophet Wizard of the Crayon Cake 08:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the notice. I have RL stuff to do today, so won't be available for hours. I stand by his block, especially as it was his 5th unique block for 3RR by 5 different admins. Wikibofh(talk) 15:38, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intro on SKZB - appreciate your tidying-up

[edit]

Well, yeah. I don't admit to coherency every time I'm on Wiki, WikiBOFH. =grin= In fact, I tend to be on late, when I'm sleepy. Somehow that's when it becomes Very Important to do something.

BTW, I've been trying to follow up the new LARP thing. You're far more Web-savvy than I. Can you find anything but this?

http://www.silwest.com/dragon/index.html

According to Steve, he remembers them asking for his permission.

Thanks.

=Chica=

  • Hm....I'll see what I can find. I know LARPs have been popular for a long time, so I wouldn't be suprised. I suspect if we asked the mailing list we'd get some good answers. Looks like Opusfest had some, so I'm guess Rjion would be the authortative source on that. Here is a link. Wikibofh(talk) 00:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fra Angelico

[edit]

Thannks for fixing the references. I couldn't make them stick!

--Amandajm 02:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, thank you. You've been doing a lot of work on the article, which is good. I was just doing tyding.  :) My only comment is that the references, should be, well references.  :) Several seem to be some sort of "common knowledge" which isn't common to monoglots such as myself.  :) Wikibofh(talk) 03:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

recreating deleted material

[edit]

I see that you're trying to prevent some editors from trying to get around AFD by recreating Okashina Okashi as Strange Candy. For what it's worth, I've just tagged Strange Candy (webcomic) for speedy deletion. -- Dragonfiend 19:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crap

[edit]

I always thought there was one IP kinda embedded in your machine that was near impossible to change. Ah, well. So I screwed up-I'm not the one blocked. --69.145.123.171 20:54, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nope. An IP address is a not associated with hardware in anyway. I won't get into the technical reasons, but suffice it to say that it would be both impractical and a bad idea. Wikibofh(talk) 21:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Revolution of 1917

[edit]

Hi! Can you please explain your reasoning behind reverting an edit to Russian Revolution of 1917? As far as I can tell, not being an expert on the matter in any way, the foreign intervention in the war indeed backed the White Guard, and particularly its right-wing bourgeois elements, rather than the Mensheviks specifically. In fact, I would be surprised if e. g. the USA had given any special support to a Socialist faction. Thanks in advance. —xyzzyn 20:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Really, I'd prefer it if you didn't make me actually research changes.  :) I have reverted myself. Initially it just looked like vandalism to me. Anon IP removing a wikilinked phrase. I have now gone and looked at the entries for both the White_Movement and the Mensheviks. The whites clearly indicates participation from the governments mentioned, where as the Mensheviks does not. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Wikibofh(talk) 21:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Book citations

[edit]

Thanks a bunch for showing me how to create proper book citations. I'm lazy enough to prefer the web, but I really do enjoy books. I'm getting the hang of the citations now thanks to you. I'll use them! Rklawton 23:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Giovanni33

[edit]

I have reset the block you placed on User:Giovanni33's account due to apparent evasion. That occured on the 3rd, so I set it seven days after that, four days from today. I hope you don't mind. -Will Beback 09:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extended block of User:160.94.224.179

[edit]

Fine. Not a problem. To be honest I don't think you need to contact me about this sort of thing.Geni 15:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Great. I was just trying to be courteous. I don't know if some admins get uptight about block changes, so I err on the side of communication. As you can see, personally, I don't care about extensions, and rarely even care about shortening. Wikibofh(talk) 15:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem at all with one week from my side too, I also think that long-term blocks need to be 'earned accumulatively' for something. (Doesn't change the fact though that technically, only one week is still too good for him... :-p) Femto 15:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

[edit]
For protecting Texas Tech University to discourage vandalism, I award you the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar. Thank you for your diligence. Johntex

Turkey

[edit]

Hi, can you re-protect the article again ? RogerMooreArm/Lifer00 is back - This time as User:Houlihan1.--Kilhan 04:18, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you keep an eye on Turkey? RogerMooreArm isnt a new user anymore, and he/she's back editing the article again. Kilhan 04:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, you may want to take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/RogerMooreArm regularly as a RogerMooreArm sockpuppy was confirmed and blocked before. --Cat out 09:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think its safe to unprotect the article now since the sockpuppet has been confirmed and blocked. --Cat out 09:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Unprotected. I meant to get it before wikibreak, but missed that one. Wikibofh(talk) 14:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Marshmello fluff.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for the amazingly quick response to my image request! Would you mind also uploading the original image to the Commons? (Just revert to the current version after you upload the original.) That way if someone (possibly me) wants to crop the image more closely in the future they can work with the original file. This prevents additional quality loss due to re-compression. Thanks! -SCEhardT 13:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • My pleasure. I had the 'perfect storm' of opportunity. Wife shopping, kids napping, a camera and fluff in the house.  :) I'm not sure I believe it's possible to top my high quality photoshop skills.  :) A simple cropped version is now available at (the correctly spelled this time) Image:Marshmellow fluff.jpg. I've also uploaded a simple cropped version of one against a darker background at Image:Marshmellow fluff2.jpg. That one came out a little over exposed, so I hadn't used it. If you want the 'glamour shots' that show my toaster oven as well, I can upload that, but I'm not sure there is that much compression.

Thanks! I'll put the image in my to-do -SCEhardT 23:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Had a spare moment today so I´ve put a new version up at marshmallow creme - hopefully the background color isn´t too garish (it can´t be white because then the fluff on the spoon won´t look right) -SCEhardT 11:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly the bottom was slightly obscured by the towel and thus came out crazy-looking when I cut out the towel. I tried another version with the subject breaking two edges of the picture to hopefully improve the look. (I have now officially spent way too much time on this photo!) -SCEhardT 16:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AN/Incidents comment

[edit]

Hello, I ran into your comment on the Incidents noticeboard under unblocking of Giovanni33 and saw your post about how sockpuppet users can fool checkuser. I figured that if you are indeed correct about the possible methods then maybe you should delete that part of comment so you don;t give more possible sock masters any ideas if you catch my reasoning.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 14:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Shay911

[edit]

Thanks for blocking this user -- however, it seems another admin blocked them for only 1 hour, one minute after you. Can you re-block them permanently? Thanks. Catamorphism 14:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ART TYRANT

[edit]

I AM NOT TRYING TO ADVERTISE ON WIKIPEDIA. PLEASE SEE THE BELOW PARAGRAPH IN WHICH I SENT TO (user) Tyrenius (ART SPECIALIST - WHO APPARENTLY TAKES THIS PERSONALLY - AND DID NOT RESPOND - SO I RE-ADDED THE LINK) - mind you, there are other galleries listed under links that are not as pertinent as ours.

I'm only asking for a link on the Sam Francis Page and the Jim Dine (artist) pages.

Hi~

I understand you are the main writer/contributor for the arts section in Wikipedia. Great job! I am new to all of this so I apologize if I've overstepped any boundaries.

I added our link (Jonathan Novak Contemporary Art) to a couple of the art pages thinking it might be helpful to users - not for advertising purposes - but noticed the link had been removed. My co-worker then told me he received a message from you while he was researching something off-topic. Maybe I added it to too many pages which made it look suspicious.

Will you consider adding a link to our gallery for the artists Sam Francis and Jim Dine for the following reasons: - We represent the Estate and have close affiliation with them. - We have a direct connection to the SF Estate - When the Estate will not deal with someone, they send them to us - We are a main source for authenticating Sam Francis works and history/provenance searches. - We also have the largest inventory of a variety of Sam Francis works including works on canvas, paper, prints/lithos, monotypes, screenprints, trial proofs, etc. - direct Francis page link - http://www.novakart.com/Artist-Detail.cfm?ArtistsID=355 - these are just the works we list on the site.

As far as Jim Dine goes: We represent the artist http://www.novakart.com/Artist-Detail.cfm?ArtistsID=369

I originally added the link to our home page www.novakart.com because the other links (on wikipedia) were broken and they were all directed to a page within a site. I thought the best way to keep the link solid was to use the main page.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Please feel free to email me if you have any questions.

Maegan Jonathan Novak Contemporary Art —Preceding unsigned comment added by Novakart (talk • contribs) 20:14, July 10, 2006

  • Art tyrant? Wow, I was going for dictator. You make a good case for those, but I guess my question is what do they add to an encyclopedia? I like the stuff here, for example, but simply a link to some images for stuff you sell looks like advertising. WP:EL says some of the links to be avoided are:
Links that are added to promote a site, that primarily exist to sell products or services, with objectionable amounts of advertising, or that that require payment to view the relevant content.
What does your site do that is not "primairly exist to sell products or services"? Wikibofh(talk) 20:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wikibofh/Archive5&oldid=1146627714"