User talk:Winhunter/Archive-Dec06
Greetings. Would you be kind enough to have a look at this image? The unloader continues his history of license abuses. Óðinn 16:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 13th.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 46 | 13 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 23:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Request for unblock Omura entry
Hello. I understand you are following WP guidelines and are asking me to do the same. It sounds a good way to go. But again, if others are teaming up to collectively effectively sabotage (ignore and revert consensus decisions made by all involved included them during recent meidation), your intervention is in effect serving the goal of mocking the mediation process - regardless of your intention. Please think about this. Thank you.Richardmalter 08:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
omg typo alert
"Please read our our username policy and choose another name" (just letting you know -- didn't dig through your monobook to see where it's coming from). Luna Santin 23:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 20th.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 47 | 20 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Would You Take a Look at This Please....
Hello Winhunter, would you take a look at this comment that this user has left on an admin's talk page. He has a fairly large amount of sockpuppet evading bans (see here). You might as well check this too.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 03:12, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry but here's another small childish blurb of his.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 03:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
User Mystìc
hi this is user Mystìc here, you have declined to unblock my account saying as per below. If you check the checkuser request the allegation was that the users Vandalized the user:Sudharsansn's page. If you check my contributions you can see I have not done anything like that. In fact I didn't even know such a user existed b4 the block. Further more I've been accused of vote stacking for the template that was nominated for deletion, you can verify for your self in my contributions that I have not done so. And I've been accused as a sockpuppet for user:Lahiru_k again whom I have not had any relation to and nor I endorse his behavior in wikipedia. I kindly request you to unblock my user account. Thanks and regards 222.165.157.129 08:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
reverted why?
Miltopia's my friend, and he specifically asked to be made to laugh in that section... why would you revert my funny limericks, that weren't even visible? -GTBacchus(talk) 02:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- That's an honest mistake. In hindsight, thanks for reverting my vandalism; I don't blame you for not checking whether it was invited. It so seldom is. Cheers. -GTBacchus(talk) 09:16, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
AIV
Thanks for blocking. --Dweller 09:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
My block review
Hi Winhunter, I sent you an email to which I got no repsonse. Can you explain to me why you decided that I was 'disruptive' on the BDORT page? Thanks, Crum375 12:03, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- (copied from my Talk page, Crum375 15:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC))
- The reasons I considered you disruptive is because your previous reverts in the article and the fact that this time is a near 3RR. --WinHunter (talk) 13:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your response, Winhunter. May I ask if you have ever seen me go over 3RR, anywhere? Or ever being uncivil or violating any WP rule? And is being 'near 3RR', while trying to keep an article under mediation stable, considered 'disruption' in your opinion? Also, do you think that an editor who's contributed a lot to WP and had never been warned, blocked or been uncivil, deserves at least a warning and a chance to explain himself before being summarily blocked? Crum375 15:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Quote from WP:3RR: "The three-revert rule is not an entitlement, but an "electric fence"; the 3RR is intended to stop edit wars. It does not grant users an inalienable right to three reverts every 24 hours or endorse reverts as an editing technique." In my opinion, repeatedly going near 3RR is disruption. My view is that if it is consensus then it would not require a single editor to even go near 3RR. If you still disagree with my reasoning feel free to ask another admin to review my decision. --WinHunter (talk) 15:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Winhunter, I am fully familiar with that statement, and as I mentioned to you in my email I normally try to stick to a 1RR, except in some unusual cases, and this was one of them. I do intend to get some more view points on this issue, as you suggest, but I do care about your own views, as you were directly involved. You did not respond to my question above about the need for a warning message prior to a block, I would appreciate your opinion on that point also. Thanks, Crum375 16:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry for missing that part. My view is: For new users, warnings are required as they do not know about Wikipedia policies. For established users, they are assumed to know the policies such as 3RR. While warnings is preferable, it is not required before a block take place. --WinHunter (talk) 16:48, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I guess I am not familiar with the part of the policy that says that an established and civil contributor, who had never been warned, never been blocked, can get blocked for 'disruption' without any warning whatsoever. My best understanding of WP's spirit and rules is that we bend over backwards to try to explain why a particular behavior is contrary to rules or otherwise disruptive. In this case, there was no effort whatsoever made to explain the disruption prior to a block being applied. BTW, part of WP's policies are also its common practices. And to the best of my knowledge, many (if not most, or even all) of the WP's best editors would from time to time resort to reverting 3 times, with proper warnings and edit summaries. I can buy your argument that to you personally my 3 reverts, despite their edit summaries and Talk page notes looked 'disruptive'. But I think that even then, a warning message is still warranted prior to a block. Crum375 17:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry for missing that part. My view is: For new users, warnings are required as they do not know about Wikipedia policies. For established users, they are assumed to know the policies such as 3RR. While warnings is preferable, it is not required before a block take place. --WinHunter (talk) 16:48, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Winhunter, I am fully familiar with that statement, and as I mentioned to you in my email I normally try to stick to a 1RR, except in some unusual cases, and this was one of them. I do intend to get some more view points on this issue, as you suggest, but I do care about your own views, as you were directly involved. You did not respond to my question above about the need for a warning message prior to a block, I would appreciate your opinion on that point also. Thanks, Crum375 16:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Quote from WP:3RR: "The three-revert rule is not an entitlement, but an "electric fence"; the 3RR is intended to stop edit wars. It does not grant users an inalienable right to three reverts every 24 hours or endorse reverts as an editing technique." In my opinion, repeatedly going near 3RR is disruption. My view is that if it is consensus then it would not require a single editor to even go near 3RR. If you still disagree with my reasoning feel free to ask another admin to review my decision. --WinHunter (talk) 15:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your response, Winhunter. May I ask if you have ever seen me go over 3RR, anywhere? Or ever being uncivil or violating any WP rule? And is being 'near 3RR', while trying to keep an article under mediation stable, considered 'disruption' in your opinion? Also, do you think that an editor who's contributed a lot to WP and had never been warned, blocked or been uncivil, deserves at least a warning and a chance to explain himself before being summarily blocked? Crum375 15:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
How Do You View This?
Hello Winhunter. As an admin of Wikipedia how do you view someone creating an image for a vandalism barnstar, as a sockpuppet of JINXTENGU has done? I just think its a tad desperate for a vandal but is this considered appropriate? I would think an award that encourages the destruction of Wikipedia is not in essence an award for Wikipedia.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 06:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Update: admin pschemp took care of it.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 07:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
WinBot should not make changes within nowiki tags
See my post at Village Pump.
Others appear to agree WinBot should not make changes to apparent template calls inside <nowiki> (or <pre>) tags. I.e. it changed the apparent welcome template in error.--SportWagon 15:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Hey, mate - you dealt with this IP before (and someone's strange campaign to use Marco Rullo to attack "Kyle.") He's back, and doing the exact same thing - if you get a minute, can you take a look? Thanks, --TheOtherBob 22:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 27th.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 48 | 27 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting the page. Could you please restore the old reversions as well? I had them deleted earlier today because I am leaving, but I have decided that I would like to keep them for historical purposes and so my contribs aren't fragmented (I know I'm a total egotist ;-). Please leave the retirement message as the live page however, and I would appreciate if you could re-protect the page afterwards (if that's needed) Thanks very much for your help! Mike1 03:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I saw your post on the talk page of Turkey about the Prime Minister.. I looked for the logical inconsistency that you mentioned, however I was unable to find it.. If you can show me where it is, I will fix it.. Thanks.. Baristarim 14:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- ok then, sorry about the confusion.. Cheers!Baristarim 14:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 4th.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 49 | 4 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello. It appears that you deleted the Martian Hard On (cocktail) article. I do not seem to be able to access the information from that old page (probably a result of the deletion, go figure). I was hoping that you might be able to view it, since you are the admin who deleted it. That cocktail is listed in the List of cocktails that I am rennovating as part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Cocktails (though I seem to be doing 95% of the work).
What I need is to pull the essential info (whatever it was) out of the article and add it to the list. If you could do that for me, that would be terrific. Also, if you see any more cocktail stubs like that pop up in prods or afd, I would really appreciate knowing about it. Or, if it looks like the article will be deleted, just move the info to the list. Additionally, once I finish cleaning up the list, I will be requesting a number of removals of stubs which have already been merged into the list. To put it another way, right now it would be very helpful if people don't delete cocktail-related stubs for a bit, until I can salvage the bits of useful info first -- then we can have a mass deletion (whoo-hoo!). Thanks! --Willscrlt 10:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Approve/reject AutoWikiBot requests?
I saw you are an admin who has recently updated the Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. Could you please process the current registration requests on Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage? Thanks. -- SilverStar★ 00:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank You
Thank You Winhunter for unblocking me. I am very grateful to you. Fighting for Justice 01:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
EXPLANATION ON DELETION
hello winhunter,a recent article that i wrote about A NOTABLE icon in the malaysian music industry was deleted.i have gone through all the criteria's before writing the article.by all means,i am not trying to be rude,but if you think that writing about a NOTABLE AWARD WINNING MALAYSIAN MUSIC PRODUCER is gibberish,well it is quite OFFENSIVE not only to me but the millions of music lovers locally in my country.pls review this.as for the criterias for music composers,D'NAVIGATOR not only passes all the criteria.as he has produced and is currently working with malaysia's leading award winning artists.
FOLLOWING ARE THE WEBPAGES OF MALAYSIAN MUSICIANS who have worked with navigator WHICH U CAN PERSONALLY CONTACT TO LEARN MORE ABOUT him.THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION.
these are some of the biggest names in the malaysian english and malay music industry which u can contact:
www.toophat.com.my www.sasithedon.com www.reshmonu.com www.ahlifiqir.com
pls review,and explain.thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dr.klef (talk • contribs) 16:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC).
Merry Christmas!
Dr Santa - talk 16:54, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Just a heads-up. Someone seems to be spoofing you here. --NMChico24 08:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Your block of Yao Ziyuan
You blocked User:Yao Ziyuan indef, citing "unauthorized bot; contributions reveal edit rate up to 15 edits/min & 7973 edits made during November".
I disagree with your block, because the user has not been editing at more than 3 edits/min since after Dec 5. Furthermore, he appears never to have been informed or warned about the consequences of editing using automated scripts. Therefore I do not think it is fair to punish someone for what appears to be an offense out of ignorance comitted in the recent past.
Although I disagree about it, I will not undo your block. Kimchi.sg 15:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
AWB Approvals
Good morning! I noticed that you removed a number of names from the AWB approval request list (including my own) with a comment of "5 approved, 4 declined" (diff here), but it doesn't look like you actually updated the AWB check page with any approvals, nor did you comment on any of our talk pages. Was this an oversight, or are you just working on further approvals and will update when you're done? Thanks, and here's hoping I'm one of the approved! :) —Krellis 16:06, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Great, thanks a lot for taking care of it and for the approval! —Krellis 16:33, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 11th.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 50 | 11 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Your block of Yao Ziyuan
Hello, I don't believe it was proper that you blocked User:Yao Ziyuan without any warning. And the fact that the block does not expire seems quite excessive. Please reconsider this action. Badagnani 19:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Winhunter, seeing that two other users have questioned your block above, and you don't seem to be online, I'm going to tell the guy I'll unblock him, under condition that he won't make further mass edit until further clarification. Hope that's okay with you. I'll wait until I get some feedback from him though. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
SharedIPEDU's
Don't forget to run a WHOIS query. 167.206.54.70 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) was telling the truth. -- Netsnipe ► 13:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Dynamic Symmetry
Hello, I've recently noticed that the article for Dynamic symmetry has been deleted. I've been unable to locate an AFD related to this page. I can't find a reason for its deletion. I had recently edited that article, and is linked from another article that I watch. Any information regarding its reason for deletion would be very helpful. It seems to me that the system in place to locate the reason for an articles deletion is overly complex and requires many hoops to be jumped in order to find any explanation, but I cannot find one for this article. Thanks, --MattWatt 17:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. Yes I would like to request that it be restored. The article itself was very short, it really should have been marked a stub, but the subject matter deserves to be in WP. I must have missed it being marked for deletion, I certainly would have objected or at least been open to a discussion with whomever felt that it didn't need to exist. --MattWatt 00:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- it seems there was also a talk page. Not much was lost I think, but could it be restored too. --MarSch 18:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- BTW why are there no section edit links?
Please also delete user page
I see you closed my nomination to delete the user-talk page User talk:Io anthonyio anthony and speedily deleted it. Unfortunately, there's also the user page User:Io anthonyio anthony (which you can check doesn't correspond to any existing user) that I neglected to mention in the nomination. It was actually the latter page that was originally created by a user and then later blanked to move the contents to the talk page. Neither page is required anymore since I've moved the relevant discussion to the correct user-talk page, User talk:Io anthony. Long story short: User:Io anthonyio anthony also needs to be deleted. Thanks. - dcljr (talk) 16:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Stub Page Deletion
Hi, I wonder if you can help me? Can you please explain why you deleted a Personal Stub page of mine, which was a potential article in creation? Further, why not at least leave a courtesy note telling me what you had done, and also hopefully explaining why? Rgds, - Trident13 17:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- I was responding to a speedy deletion request which that page was tagged as CSD G11. I have now restored the page. --WinHunter (talk) 04:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- OK - Thank You! Rgds, - Trident13 09:48, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello i think it would be appropriate if you un-protect Turkish coffee it's been protected for a while. Nareklm 06:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Done--WinHunter (talk) 06:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you. Nareklm 06:56, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
My RfA
I have revised my answer to question 1 and I have answered the bonus questions. -- Selmo (talk) 16:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Semi-protection
Thanks for activating the semi-protection on Tiger Woods & Barry Bonds this morning. I can agree with your decision on Pop art I guess. However, Jesse Jackson is a problem especially because of the nastiness of some of the vandalism. Even though he might be slightly less vandalized than my approved request of the day (Bonds, Woods, and Donald Trump), the offensiveness of the vandalism is slightly higher. May I request a reconsideration of Jackson.
Also, I stumbled upon the topic of protection while viewing the Barack Obama page. I was wondering what the difference is between the type of protection on this page and that on Obamas. I notice that we have the template at the top instead of a subtle lock. What are the effective differences in the level of protection prevented. Please reply at my talk page. TonyTheTiger 19:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
RfA Thanks
|
Thank you for participating in my RfA. I decided to end it; more time is needed, and I probably need a bit more experience. From here, I think I'll look at community discussion, AfD and the like. I will try to improve in the areas of concern, and thanks to everyone who supplied feedback. -- Selmo (talk) 06:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |