User talk:Wknight94/Archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


GraalOnline Article Recreation

I'm unsure of the proper channels to go through about the recreation of the GraalOnline article, but I know you were involved in it's deletion and debates. I was wondering if it would be possible to recreate the GraalOnline article if written by an external editor with no allegiances to either side of the issue? Kevinazite 22:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

RE:Your user and talk pages categores

Fixed. --TaeKwonTimmy 23:18, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Alexanderj/Rising Dissent categories

Thanks for pointing that out, I had forgotten that I created the page as a test before creating the Rising Dissent article. I've deleted it. -Alexanderj 05:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Entertainers who died in their...

Just why were these category lists deleted?? I found them fascinating. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .

Good idea

I don't know the first thing about changing my user name, but I don't go around trumping or pretend to be the baseball player. Please help me change my user name to hykos. Regards. Delinodeshields 20:39, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for protecting my user and talk pages. It's good to know that although there are some assholes out there, there are people like you who are willing to combat them. Once again, thank you. ReverendG 01:41, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem. S/he will be taking a break for 24 hours. Enjoy the silence.  :) —Wknight94 (talk) 01:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I intend to. It's always good to meet an administrator that obviously deserves that title. By the way, do you have any idea why people would suddenly start using unbelievable vandalism just because of a minor disagreement? It might just be the shock of suddenly noticing such a thing against me, but it worries and puzzles me. ReverendG 01:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC) Forgot to give this to you last time, here's a non-barnstar "award".
For helping to make the internet not suck, I ReverendG award the banner of unsuckiness to Wknight94.

Requesting administrator assistance on IRC

I am taking these accusations of lack of process for using IRC quite seriously. Whether IRC should or shouldn't be used: the fact is it is used, and not just by me. Instead of debating whether using IRC is against procedure, I've proposed a procedure for when sysops use IRC to listen to Move Requests, which for now I've put on the village pump (policy) page: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Requesting_administrator_assistance_on_IRC. Your feedback is welcome. —Pengo talk · contribs 00:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Hi, Wknight94/Archive 5, thank you for applying for VandalProof. I am happy to announce that you are now authorized for use, so if you haven't already, simply download VandalProof from our main page and install it, and you're all set!

Warning to Vandals: This user is armed with VandalProof

Please join the VandalProof user category by adding either: {{User:Vishwin60/Userbox/VandalProof}} (which will add this user box) or [[Category:Wikipedians using VandalProof]] to your user page.

If you have any queries, please feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page. Welcome to our team! —Xyrael / 20:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


I am, and the scary part is my wife is 6'0" we are going to have some really tall kids someday. Whispering(talk/c) 03:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Re:My RfA

I appreciate you pointing out some of my edits, and I just thought I should explain some of them.

1) [1], I thought it was vandalism at first, but the user contacted me on my talk page, and we cleared up the whole issue. I apologized for the warning I gave and such.

2) Dealing with images isn't my strong point, as can be seen with some of the problems that have occurred. Although they were 2 months ago, put into consideration that it was only 2.5 months ago that I uploaded my first few images onto Wikipedia.

3) I know that I lost my temper over a few misunderstandings I had with that editor (I thought he was calling me stupid), and I have made amends with that editor.

4) Those edits are considered fighting? I originally thought it was friend I knew that made that edit, so I took the edit jokingly and such.

5) That edit was a misunderstanding, and I resolved that. I was accidentally talking to the wrong user about that (see first neutral vote).

This RfA has been a really enlightening experience for me. I personally never would have thought that people would think negatively of some of my comments, and I have realized some points that I need to avoid, and some things such as image policy that I need to review over. The RfA ended with a consensus of a promotion, and although you may think badly of me for this, but I just want to assure you that I have learned from my previous mistakes, and I think I can perform well as an admin.

Thanks for your concern, Wknight. You brought attention to some other situations that I should potentially avoid in the future, and I will take that into consideration as admin. If you have any more comments and such, please add a message to my talk page and I'll respond as soon as possible.

--Nishkid64 22:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Nishkid64's RfA thanks

Mad scientist.svg Thank you very much for participating in my RfA, which closed successfully earlier today with a result of (60/9/4). Although, I encountered a few problems in my RfA, I have peacefully resolved my conflicts and made amends with the people involved. If you have any further questions or suggestions, feel free talk to me. I hope I will live up to your expectations. --Nishkid64 22:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

CaCee Cobb deletion

Hello Mr. Knight,

I am relatively new to the whole Wikipedia editing thing, but I have been using it as a reference tool for a long time. I see that the CaCee Cobb article has recently been deleted. I would like to propose undeleting the article.

I came across her name in an article on People Magazine's website. Not knowing who she was, I searched for her on Wikipedia but didn't find an entry. I did however, find the Google-cached Wikipedia entry, which helped me understand who she was and why she was notable. I read the deletion discussion, and while I agree she is a borderline case, I think she should be included for the very reason that I wanted to look her up. I had never heard of her before but found out from People Magazine that she is dating an actor from the TV show "Scrubs". Because I wanted to know if she was notable for anything besides this, I searched for her on Wikipedia. If the page had been there, I would have known that she was Jessica Simpson's assistant and childhood friend who had appeared on numerous episodes of "Newlyweds." She seems to move enough in celebrity circles to warrant an entry. My apologies if this is the wrong location to propose undeletion.


Unity08 Interest?

Hi! You're one of about a dozen wikipedians who have edited Unity08 (which puts you in pretty rarified company :-)) and it occured to me that you might be interested in something in that vein. I don't want to clutter up your talk page but I wanted to let you know about my user page being used to talk about the intersection of wikis and the Unity Movement. Sorry to be a bother, but "a dozen out of hundreds of millions" seemed like a small enough group to think there might be some common interests :-)

- JenniferForUnity 02:09, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Bexley Hall

Apparently you were requested to move Bexley Hall (Seminary) to Bexley Hall creating a primary topic page. I don't think anyone agreed or even maintains there is a clear dominance among the items on Bexley Hall (disambiguation). "Where there is no such clearly dominant usage there is no primary topic page" -WP:D. So shouldn't Bexley Hall (disambiguation) have been moved to Bexley Hall? --J Clear 22:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. --Nishkid64 21:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

One Piece articles

Did you fulfill User:Justyn's move request for Seven Warlords of the Sea to Shichibukai? If so, keep in mind that several people have contested the naming changes.

I learned about this after Justyn told me that Wikipedians in general support what Justyn is doing, and he cited you as an example:

WhisperToMe 01:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

WhisperToMe is putting words in my mouth, I never said that Wikipedians in general support what I am doing, I said that I was not the one that moved the page. Here is a link to his talk page ([2])(Justyn 02:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC))

No, it seems like it was your personal opinion to move the page.

Wikipedia:Requested_moves SPECIFICALLY states that it is to be used for uncontroversial moves. User:Geg and I had opposed the moving stuff, so... WhisperToMe 02:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Another suspect

I think I found another possible Spotteddogsdotorg sock - Tecmobowl (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) TV Newser Tipline 09:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Some of his recent behavior seems to confirm my suspicions! TV Newser Tipline 09:45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

My RFA questions

Thanks for notifying me! I am watching the page, but today I've been away from my computer for longer periods of time than I had anticipated. (Figures.) It's on my watchlist and I go back to it more often than I should. I knew it was going to be nerve-wracking, but, holy! This is intense! Thanks for your feedback and assistance. -- Merope Talk 16:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Tecmobowl: Sockpuppet

Just look at Tecmobowl (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) and his contributions. He has targeted baseball related articles, something CFIF (talk · contribs) has had a run in with TBTA (talk · contribs) who was the unwitting victim of the Spotteddogsdotorg (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) sockpuppet ring thanks to Scott Brown from TBTA feels he was driven off Wikipedia by Tecmobowl and communicated his suspicion that the user may be part of the sock ring.

Tecmobowl's ëdit styles, types of edits reflect the those of the sock ring, as his reaction to being accused, including denials and anon ip attacks. What has changed is that he did not target CFIF directly with this latest sock, leading me to think that this is most likely a new form of attack from this problematic vandal taking the time to make seemingly good edits, along with many questionable ones, such as claiming links are spam when they are not. I feel that the overt avoiding of CFIF is a move to throw off suspicion, as is his avoiding AFDs. However, the other activities by Tecmobowl, especially the choice of who he attacked and the anon attacks seem to be typical of the Scott Brown/Spotteddogsdotorg sock ring.

Respectfully submitted. TV Newser Tipline 21:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I am getting quite frustrated with this person. He/she refuses to engage in a conversation with me on his talk page about this. He insists on trying to engage others in conversations about me, yet hypocritically reverts my comments on his page. TBTA was not driven off by me. That user made ridiculous edits on Baseball card and refused to make accurate edits. I ended up having to do it for him. I never once attacked you or anything you said until you started this harassment. At that point I told you to go learn to read. I believe there is nothing that will come of this, but I would like to be kept abrest of the topics if they are going to involve me. The pages I have edited are mostly related to Baseball because that's what I am a fan of. Of cours I'm going to react to being accused of this and deny the claims when they are untrue and totally uncalled for. I'm not vandalizing anything. --Tecmobowl 01:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


A Coin Off Rims (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) has been reverting my recent edits, calling them minor. Also, look at my talk page history and there is an IP there that claims they are Displaced Brit. --CFIF 02:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
  • The user name seems to be an anagram for "CFIF is a moron" which makes it a blatant attack. TV Newser Tipline 15:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

X in literature watchlist

Thanks for your note about the desirability of having the X in literature articles on people's watchlists. Firstly, I agree with your point that it would be good to have them all "babysat". Secondly, these articles figure highly in the niche I've found for myself on Wikipedia. So, yes, I'd be willing to monitor some of them in my watchlist. Is there any kind of concerted plan to "divvy" them up among a group of editors? --Lini 12:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Another anon vandal (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • nuke contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log) just take a look at what it has been doing! TV Newser Tipline 15:43, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Just did a whois [3] and it appears to be an ISP in NYC. If it is just one person they must be using some sort of proxy. TV Newser Tipline 15:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Images on episode lists

(removed long sentences)

The images on the episode lists improve the article, and the images can idenitfy the key points of the episode, the summary can do that too, but some people like to see whats going on in the episode. Please help me (Yugigx60 17:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC))

IP Block

I noticed the sporadic editing by the user, and that was why I made the initial block of one week. I have changed it to one day now, because I don't want this block to affect other potentially good users from editing on Wikipedia. My reasoning for the initial block was because the edits were so spaced out, and the person had vandalized every few days, and I thought if I blocked them for a week, I could possibly discourage them from contributing negatively to Wikipedia. --Nishkid64 18:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I have a question here. See here. I was about to block that user for maybe a day or two, but not for a whole month like DVD did. Would this be a case in which a long-term block is appropriate because the user has only made bad edits? I would think that is the reason for his decision (and also because the last block was a month long), but I just want to make sure. Thanks for answering my question. --Nishkid64 18:27, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Category:Entertainers by age upon death

I noticed that you are supportive of the Entertainers by age at death which has recently been deleted. I saved the contents of most of those categories. Should the option to listify them be explored? Q0 20:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Sure, why not. It would be best if it were sourced and came from some other reliable source's list though. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
How should this be done? Should I create some of the lists and/or would you like me to send you the lists? If I were to create one of these lists, would I be at risk of violating a policy of Wikipedia to create a listified version of a recently deleted category? What I have is basically a copy/paste from the categories, so a bit of formating would also be necessary. I guess the way to reference it would be to find sources that indicate the date of birth and death. However, I think there is a good chance that the lists will eventually be deleted, so I'm not sure if it would be worth the hassle of referencing. Q0 20:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Dredging up episode list image issue again

Yugigx60 (talk · contribs) is being persistent on this issue of images on episode list articles. It's my understanding that such usage is not allowed. Some people say no fair use images should be allowed anywhere and some say it should be a free-for-all but I think at least not allowing 150 of them on an episode list article is a good compromise. I think this pretty easily fails #8 of the WP:FUC policy as well as #3. The images are already being used in the articles for the specific episode - using them again in the episode list goes beyond the policy. A few people - User:Ta bu shi da yu for one if I recall - have gone through sports-related articles removing team logos from standings tables, etc. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:57, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't really have an opinion on this anymore: I was leaning towards including images before I was aware of the real copyright problems, but now I really don't care; whatever you guys want to do is OK with me. —Mets501 (talk) 01:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Talk page

Don't ever threaten me again. I don't take kindly to that at all. Your tone is disrespectful, insulting, rude, and inconsiderate. Rarelibra 02:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh wow, thank you SOOOOO much for "keeping an eye out" on things - like noticing the blatant renaming of the improper naming convention in Italy. Wow, what a hero. Next time thank me for keeping the country safe, bud. Rarelibra 04:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I award you this barnstar for noticing and reverting an impersonator who vandalized my user page. Thank you so much. Best regards Húsönd 03:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for removing vandalism on my user page... again.--Húsönd 02:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


hello Wknight94, thank you for your help on dealing with User:Rarelibra on South Tyrol, Trentino-South Tyrol and Bozen-Bolzano. I warned the user before already, however he seems immune to good advice. If you need help with the 3RR, let me know. I already reported his behaviour on the admin. noticeboard, I don't know if it helped.. Gryffindor 07:23, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

You might want to reconsider your vote in the vote of South Tyrol. The name is official and most commonly used, the websites show it plus Google hits, see[4] and the website of the government of South Tyrol [5]. thanks Gryffindor 09:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
On the campaign trail already there buddy? Someday you must tell me what your motiviation is in this project of yours. I'm making some guesses, but I want to assume good faith. :) The most interesting of all is trying to rename the Province of Bolzano (Bozen) to South Tyrol; it is by far my favourite. :))) Cheerio. Taalo 09:44, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Give me a break, Wknight94. Don't walk around all high and mighty. And LEAVE ME ALONE. Further harrassment will be reported. Rarelibra 16:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Ten Million (baseball player)

I am familiar with both of those naming conventions. I simply used the one outlined here WP:DAB#Disambiguation_links regarding ColdFusion. It's a minor issue to me, so it will just stay this way. Not sure why you went in and put in the time when I said I was in the middle of updating the article but then again, doesn't matter to me. If you feel your version has more merit than mine, please feel free to change it, move it, or whatever. Best of luck. --Tecmobowl 17:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Ahh - sorry about that...didn't mean to axe anyone's version :-( I left the comment about me adding content in the summary box, i didn't think it would be appropriate to put Tecmobowl is writting more content for this. I have used the sandbox before but never for creating full articles. I will start to play around with that though. Thanks for the advice, still learning my way around this place. Hopefully, people like what i put out there. I see your point, I actually use ColdFusion, but did not even think about the space/no space issue. Thanks again for the pointers. --Tecmobowl 18:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


Spent a half-hour writing a mini-disseratation on the region in talk of south tyrol. tell me if you any more questions. i got to just hope that reason prevails, neutral admins step in, and the people biased to either extreme learn to grow up and chill the heck out. later.. Taalo 23:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Administrational assistance with a repeat vandal

The annonymus user "" has repeatedly vandalised the pages : Creatures of Magic: The Gathering, and Paintball, he has been warned, and continues to vandalise, would you be able to temporaraly, or permenently block him from editing those pages? (Justyn 17:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC))

Thanks, I'm not very new, but I'm still new enough to not know the site like the back of my hand. I'll be sure to use the proper channels the next time.(Justyn 23:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC))

Image discussion

You have been asked to participate in a mediation relating to the use images in articles detailing episodes of the Pokémon anime. If you wish to input into discussion, you can do so here, all help is welcomed towards a positive resolution. Cheers, Highway Daytrippers 21:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Temple of Poseidon.jpg Thank you for participating in my RfA, which finished with a tally of 66/11/5. I learned quite a bit during the process, and I expect to be learning a lot more in the days ahead. I will be taking things slowly (and doing a lot of re-reading), but I hope you will let me know if there is anything I can do to improve in my new capacity. -- Merope Talk 12:53, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

World Series

I disagree with your recent reversion of my edit to the World Series article. Finding the list of teams that have never appeared in the WS requires reading the fourth graf, finding the list of eight franchises that have yet to win the WS, then subtracting the three teams identified as having appeared in the series but not won it (Of those eight teams, only three have appeared in the Series: Milwaukee, San Diego, and Houston.) Someone with the question "What teams have never appeared in a World Series?" has to do a little work to find the answer. Putting the list below the table makes it quick and easy, and provides a measure of completeness to that section by listing all 30 teams somewhere. Thanks. | Mr. Darcy talk 03:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Good idea (and nice work on that table). Have a look at what I did and let me know what you think. I took out the 4th graf, moved the never-made-it teams into that table as the last five rows with a comment on their best playoff finish, and moved the drought info and the line on the Yanks to the top of the trivia section. If you have thoughts, maybe you could put them on the article's talk page so that others can comment too. Thanks! | Mr. Darcy talk 15:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Just wanted to send a quick note of thanks for your support in my RfA. :-) I really appreciate it! Best, Irongargoyle 19:56, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

X in literature watchlist

Hi, Wknight, I'm repeating the following entry I made earlier, thinking it might have got overlooked in the midst of many other notes. On the same token, you may be just very busy and haven't had time to respond. But, I didn't want you to think that I had ignored your initial message. If you have already seen it, I apologize for the duplication. --Lini 12:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your note about the desirability of having the X in literature articles on people's watchlists. Firstly, I agree with your point that it would be good to have them all "babysat". Secondly, these articles figure highly in the niche I've found for myself on Wikipedia. So, yes, I'd be willing to monitor some of them in my watchlist. Is there any kind of concerted plan to "divvy" them up among a group of editors? --Lini 12:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi. No, there's no real "plan" as such for divvying up articles. Basically whatever articles you can put on yur watchlist would be an improvement. Unwatched articles is what caused the John Seigenthaler Sr. Wikipedia biography controversy and we don't want a repeat of that. —Wknight94 (talk) 12:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Well then, I'll get things started by taking a century - the 1600's). I'll begin adding them to my watchlist, and monitoring them. One hundred articles may be a lot, but I don't expect a whole lot of new activity in the 1600s articles. If we get a lot more editors involved and want to subdivide into smaller sets to watch, then I'll be glad to do so. --Lini 12:58, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


It seems I have two accounts, which you noted. How do I keep one and get rid of the other?

Oh, and thank you for watching over my contributions. I am careful to quote first-hand observations when possible, so I was a bit shocked when someone tried to move one of them.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vsanborn (talkcontribs) .

Re: Infolithium

Fair enough. At the time, there wasn't much of any contribution history to go with, so I opted to AGF and look at it as a collateral damage case. If the user has engaged in the same behaviors, I wouldn't object to (re)blocking as a sock/meatpuppet. If the user continues to be a problem, it doesn't seem to make much difference whether they're brothers or the same person. Apologies for not contacting you; at the time, I thought it might've been more of a hassle to clutter your talk page, but I suppose I should have known better. Luna Santin 20:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Baseball

You appear to have invited me to participate. Do I sign in somewhere or just continue to edit baseball-related articles? B00P 21:01, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


Just wanted to ask something about the autoban. It keeps popping back up almost everytime I come on. As the blocking admin, I was wondering if there's some reason for this. Also, as I noticed before I commented, you seem to have some concerns about sockpuppetry with accounts on my IP address. I know that this whole ordeal is rather incriminating, but I am not a sockpuppet of Profilio nor is he a sockpuppet of mine. Sorry if this mess has caused you any problems. And as for the "long, ranting" speech left on my talk page, it's something I wrote after reading personal accounts of multiple users. I know it may be long winded (mostly because it contains the long-winded emails Profilio has sent to you), but the two paragraphs I have written are the real message. Well, this is all looking rather long-winded itself, so I'm going to stop talking. Sorry if this mess has caused you any trouble, Infolithium 21:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Three-revert rule

you said i am in danger of violating the Three-revert rule, but is the person who keeps changing my UNBIASED information to biased information in danger as well? if not, then i will keep on posting because that would be considered unfair ;) -- 02:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not an edit war at all.. if you read my report, he was defmtory and is vandalizing. He leaves himself open for a lawsuit, as stated in in his user talk page for his ip address. I revert his edits as they are more a personal attack. his first edit was a personal attack towards me and defametory, and cam eout of nowhere for no reason. Alankc 02:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC) Alankc 03:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


I think its more useful to have them discuss the problem than block them both. I will check the article in an hour and unprotect it.--Peta 03:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

There seems to be agreement. I've unprotected the page. Feel free to block them if they choose something else to disagree about.--Peta 03:32, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

edit summeries?

Okay can you please explain to me your edit summeries...You say I need to provide edit summeries everytime I make a change...Does that mean on the discussion page? -TheBIrd

Certificated vs certified

It is a word, by was not the right one. Instructors are certified, aircraft are certificated. Akradecki 20:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Moving my proposed guideline and Talk

Thanks for the effort Wknight94, much appreciated. Crum375 18:25, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

revert: why?

On-16T20:58:28 you reverted edits on my home page User:Curtius. I am a new user.

  • Why was this done?
  • What was improper about these edits?

Curtius 03:21, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I understand, Thanks.

Curtius 13:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Is there some way to get the text back on a different page? If not, is it possible for you to revert the page back to-16T20:58:07? Curtius 13:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Ottawa Lynx

It is confirmed that the Ottawa Lynx are still a team in existance. You have the ability as an administrator to stop the incorrect editing. There is no proof anywhere that this team does not exist and is still in operation. Their schedule is confirmed. They play in the International League. This editing by the user who wants to make this a history page has no grounds, and should be stopped. If there is any doubt, why not call either the International League or the Ottawa Lynx themselves. To allow this person to edit freely, without any justifiaction or proof of his edits, is wrong. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .

"Beltran underperformed at first"

I think the writer meant "Beltran underperformed early in the season". I think the "at first" meant "early on", not "first base". I didn't change back it as I personally don't remember if he was worse earlier in the season.Simon12 03:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Moving of: Sailboat Design & Manufacturing

It seems that you might have discussed this move with the people who are working on this before unilateraly making such a major change.

Please return this article to where it was and let's discuss the alterantives for change.

I don't completeley disagree with the new title, but it may not fit where the article is evolving.


Kevin Murray 18:59, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of Santa Cruz Yachts

It appears that you deleted the article Santa Cruz Yachts. Please reinstate. This is part of a series of articles that several authors are working on. This was a work in progress which I began yesterday.

There is a fine line between advertising and objective information. I am not attempting to promote the brand, but it is an extemely fine though very expensive product.

I woudl appreciate some discussion before you make any more radical changes to my hard efforts.


Kevin Murray 19:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Santa Cruz Yachts

Thanks for putting it back. I'm happy to try to get a better objectivity and depth to this article.

Kevin Murray 19:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments on Spam


I see what is going on. I did not realize the problem which is developing.

I hope that what i'm working on is valuable.

I'll try to have things more developed before posting them.


Kevin Murray 03:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

unsigned edits

sorry about leaving unsigned edits, I am not sure how to do this, and I see you are getting frustrated with that...sorry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .

Not a problem. Just type four tildes (~~~~) at the end of any talk page entry you make. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


If several people are having a problem with Tecmobowl shouldn't his behavior be looked into? He has been removing things from articles that maybe shouldn't have been and is ignoring and deleting warnings. If I read the Wikipedia policies correctly this sort of behavior is vandalism and needs to be dealt with. OBILI ® ± 16:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I have looked into it, and concluded that you and the others need blocking. -Splash - tk 21:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

A new renaming discussion

FYI, since you participated in the earlier move proposal discussion: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Role-playing games#Naming conventions -- JHunterJ 17:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Stoner rock

  • I meant to do it the other day after the latest episode of "18 Speed Tranny" linkspam but must have got sidetracked. You're right, the latest edit wasn't vandalism or link spam (was quite a bizarre edit though, removing part of the intro and affecting the grammar) but in any case the article was intended to be under protection for a little while. Deizio talk 11:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

re: Bell Pottinger Group

Personally, I don't care whether the article goes or stays... perhaps those who better understand how businesses are portrayed on Wikipedia will know. It does seem to be a large firm, and the "we're number 1" thing seems to be from PR Week, the major trade magazine for the industry in the UK (even I've heard of it!). So it perhaps is "notable". On the other hand, was was there initially was just a shameless plug, as you said. For a PR firm, pretty clumsy, eh? Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 19:57, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Your user page vandalised

Just a quick note to say I've reverted vandalism to your userpage. Unfortunately the perpetrator was an AOL user so there seems little point posting on AIV or sticking a warning on the talk page. Heligoland 22:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Trouble Brewing????

Just thought you should be aware of Tecmobowls. You will notice he/she has suddenly appeared and is only contributing on pages i have recently edited. Nothing outrageous or in violation of "wiki" has happened, but this might be another example of TV Newser trying to pick a fight. Any thoughts?Tecmobowl 20:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Requesting comments for Lost episodes

Requesting comments for Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lost/Episode guidelines#Name suffix - a debate over the use of disambiguation titles for episode articles of a TV show when no disambiguation is needed. Although I now agree with the statements you made on Talk:Fire + Water, there is a small group of editors who are trying to push the issue again as apart of a forked episode guideline. Any input you could give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. -- Ned Scott 20:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandalizer Seems To Quit to No Avail

A vandalizer has consistently attacked both my user page and left comments on my talk page since last night. They had spoofed my account twice. Luna was monitoring it last night but they sneaked in another episode while I and Luna were gone, take a look at the history. I appreciate any help thank you. ¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 15:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks for responding on my talk page. I left a message for Luna that I will accept his offer for the "sprotect" tag. I'm just not one to jump to these kind of things is all :P.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 17:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Mantown AfD

FYI, I was listening to the show that mentioned the article on the way home from work last night - I would be very surprised if they didn't mention the deletion discussion on the air, so be aware of that. The show runs from 2-6 EST. Also, keep an eye on The Toucher and Rich Show, which may get some spillover. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

You may...

...want deal with this, as the blocking admin. Oh so certain it's a troll... Daniel.Bryant T · C ] 13:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Elonka Dunin Change - why not just DO IT rather than delete questioned passage?

See [6]

Google search order doesn't indicate "popularity" in the way this sentence is claiming. Be more specific saying it comes up first in a Google search if you want

I'm mystified as to why you didn't just edit the more correct indication of Google "popularity" as you addressed (and I agree) rather than just delete the reference of "popularity"? Go ahead and do what you propose ("turns up first in Google search") rather than object and delete. Wikipedia allows users to make changes directly. If you don't like something, why not just change it? - Quartermaster 16:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Block on Flow M

Thanks for the help on blocking that user. We have had a difficult time over the least 2 months or so protecting Tiananmen Square protest of 1989. Hopefully this block will help to quiet that article for a while. Though I fear it will always be a battleground article. --Mattarata 17:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


(reply) Then how about we talk about something else? I'm actually optimistic that it might lead to better communication and more harmonious editing. We might even end up liking each other, you never know.  :) I've had other editors who I had disputes with on-Wikipedia, but we kept trying to talk in good faith, and eventually figured out a communication style that worked for us. And now, I actually regard them as valued team-mates, because I like that we don't always agree. I think that leads to a more fruitful conversation, than just talking to people who always agree with me. I greatly value the input of mature individuals who show that they're confident enough to be able to express both agreement and disagreement, judging each situation individually. So, how about it? What's the worst that could happen? :) --Elonka 07:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Nice work

Good catch on Vathapi Ganapathim. I didn't think to search for copyright on this article. WVhybrid 04:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

A Few Questions

Since I'm new to all this Wikipedia editing, would someone be able to intruct me or direct me to instructions on:

i) requesting a review of a page under my user (ie Percy Nobby Norton)

ii) archiving my talk page Enknowed 06:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


Yikes I came within milliseconds of blocking that account as an imposter! I need to learn to read I think lol Glen 14:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


Was there a particular article that you were concerned about? --Elonka 19:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Romanticismlifeandtimes

Hmm. It looked to me like the article's creator had done original research based upon those sources cited at the bottom, given that "romanticismlifeandtimes" returns no Google hits (not the best test, but still should have turned up something if the concept is legit). I do still feel, even after a second reading, that the article lacks context. Perhaps this was intended for the sandbox and accidentally created in mainspace? ergot 19:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Peer Review for Lee Smith (baseball)

Well, just any basic things someone could have possibly botched up. It's a pretty long article, and it only has <20 references. I'm not worried about something specific, but more in a general perspective. Nishkid64 21:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


I agree that ES's behavior is unacceptable, but I don't see any particular advantage to changing the one-year ban to a permanent ban. The current ban has been extended about a dozen times and I expect it to be extended many more times. However I wouldn't oppose it if someone else wanted to propose it. -Will Beback 22:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


Sorry, I didn't know that he was inactive for that long, and I think that that "AD" if you like, is actually like an article, but without a neutral point of view. I was just fixing a broken link too. --Granpire Viking Man 01:35, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

By the way, he answered a question just a few weeks ago, so he couldn't have been inactive that long--Granpire Viking Man 01:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Do You mean Angels Wake or Shaded Red ?

Re: Shiga

That was a random-first test article that had no meaning what so ever. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Noodler450 (talkcontribs) .


Thanks for all the help. I know who to ask now if I need advice. I'll need to fine-tune my formatting skills if i'm ever going to expand Shaded Red or any other article. Why were you following my steps so much though ?--Granpire Viking Man 21:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Your Edit to the Template:AZ-FedRep

Thank you for your edit to the Template:AZ-FedRep. However, since the incoming members of Congress haven't taken their seats in Congress (and won't till around Jan. 2007 or Feb. 2007), I have reverted your edit to the previous version. Since the term of the 109th Congress hasn't ended, I don't think it is necessary to change the template now. However, I am open to including the representative-elects in a seperate section of the template. Jonyyeh 05:21, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Election results

Re: this revert, I'm not going to revert your revert but please consider whether readers will benefit more from us showing lame duck reps or showing upcoming congress members which will likely be around for the next two years. —Wknight94 (talk) 13:57, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

WKnight, the template is clear that it is "New Jersey's current delegation". Including Albio under that heading would not be factually correct. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 14:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

NalwinWiki deserves banning

Hi, I got this: Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Shiga (made Up counrty). It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. NawlinWiki 03:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Stop hand.svg

This is your last warning.
The next time you create an inappropriate page such as Shigā, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. NawlinWiki 13:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

And it ids not nonsense, NOT VANDALISM, NOT AN ADVERTISMENT, GO take a looksy at his talk page. it apears he is just going around and deleting things. he is a cyberbully. you should ban him from Wikipedia. I hate him.!!!--NOODLER450 00:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the hints

Thanks for the tip on the category things. I have been using the {{fact}} tag pretty much exclusively for sometime. If you see any edits from me that still have other tags like that, please adjust them when appropriate. //Tecmobowl 13:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Template editing help

I was thinking that some adjustments could be made to the {{MLB HoF}}, {{Infobox Cooperstown}}, and the {{Infobox baseball player}} templates, but I don't know what the process for suggesting changes to templates is. Ithink the cooperstown box is somewhat unnecessary on pages where the baseball player box has been used. I think the MLB HoF box could be used a lot more, but think it lacks one piece of important information: induction year. Perhaps changing the display text to be: Player Name, inducted in YEAR, is a member of the Baseball Hall of Fame. What do you think and how do i go about asking for others for their input? I'd be happy to move this discussion to my talk page or some other page where it would be more appropriate. //Tecmobowl 14:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Höckerschwan mit ausgebreiteten-Flügeln.jpg
Thank you for the extra feathers on my wings!

Thank you so much, Wknight94, for your support in my RfA, which passed on November 11, 2006, with a final tally of 82/0/2. I am humbled by the kind support of so many fellow Wikipedians, and I vow to continue to work and improve with the help of these new tools. Should you have any request, do not hesitate to contact me. Best regards, Húsönd 21:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Frasier episodes

Hi there, I started to go through and fix some Frasier eps and noticed you had beaten me to some of them. How far did you get? .. just so I don't double up on looking for title to fix! -- Chuq 08:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

sorry sorry

i will stop, but i just want to know how you found it so fast? i added it and not even a minute before you changed it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .

revised questions

FYI - the main reason I posted the revised poll questions earlier today, despite my opposition to having another poll, is to be clear that the way the questions she posed were unacceptable, and to make this clear in a specific manner as she requested. I didn't want to leave her an opening to claim "no one make any specific suggestions as I requested". Sorry if it caused any confusion, but I thought it was important to not ignore that part of what she said. --Serge 07:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


Maybe they should, I've been away for a couple of weeks. Feel free to unprotect them, or I'll have a look when I have more time. Deizio talk 12:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Montford Point Marine Association

I'm in the process of researching this article for rewrite, but I would appreciate some clarification about copyvio. another editor posted the copyright permission template on the talk page[7]; are you saying that that permission is not valid, or just not relevant? Thanx-Robotam 14:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

No, not kidding

My point was that the discourse has gotten ugly, and your responses seem to have, well, gotten personal, on this bizarrely minor issue that no one should care that much about. So do the poll. Let's get this behind us. -- PKtm 21:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Sid Fernandez


I listed a source for the Sid Fernandez article. I believe it's credible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .


I'm still in the process of figuring out what Wikipedia is (after the Comet Halley debacle). I'm reading things in Wikipedia:Simplified_Ruleset like "be bold in your edits", "Ignore all rules if it discourages you from improving Wikipedia" and "Verifyability" which confirm to me that my actions were correct, and "Assume good faith", "Be liberal in what you accept", as well as some astonishing POVs that you have about what an encyclopedia should be which suggest that your actions were incorrect. I'm guessing that the two of us are "done" in terms of trying to sort it out between us, so I'm considering mediation? Chrisobyrne 10:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I hope no one minds that I butt in here for a moment, but it's a bit of a pet peeve of mine when people start talking about "bad POV". On Wikipedia we want to write articles with a nutreral point of view. This does not mean that we have no point of view, or that we shouldn't have points of view in our own personal feelings. POV is acceptable in discussions on the talk page, suggestions, etc. In other words, the POV issue is about how articles are written, and it's not about anything and everything related to having a point of view. -- Ned Scott 04:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Lee Smith

Hehe, when I was previewing that edit in AWB, I was confused as to why it would remove the category. Apparently, it's a duplicate category, so it's all good. You can see the Louisiana category is still on the page. =) Nishkid64 01:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Vector Terminology

I was checking the deletion log for Componomotize (or the likes) and notice here [8] you said "after lies removed" Did I accidentaly do something wrong with tagging it? oO? -WarthogDemon 03:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)

The survey at the top is still open. Please vote and add comments as part of your vote! Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)#Survey -3. Also, jumping in at the end of the talk page would be helpful. In fact, you can ask if that survey is still open. Thanks! --Serge 19:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

SOF UK Mediation talk

Hey there, I'm just trying to think of a place to hide it or get rid of it completely. The mediation was ended a while back with a merge into another related article and the original article was deleted at WP:AFD a while back. I'm just cleaning up some things in my userspace and recalled this was closed a long time ago. Torinir ( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options ) 22:45, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

110th Congress delegation templates

I don't think these templates are really necessary, since they will be duplicating the information presented in the FedRep templates (i.e. Template:MD-FedRep) come January 3. Further, we can't create these templates for every new Congress since they will severely crowd the pages of long-serving Congressmen. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Well thanks!

I appreciate the compliments! That's kinda neat that stuff i work on gets read by others. I'm still learning my way around here so if you have anything that you need to yell at me about ... let it fly :-) Cheers and thank you so much for your kind words. // Tecmobowl 05:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Dark Star (radio personality)

Thanks for the heads up first time nominating a page in AFD it's done. EnsRedShirt 18:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of Professor Diane Massam

A page on Diane Massam was deleted and I would like to suggest to have it re-instated. I have read through the lengthy discussion regarding notability and academics and feel that this person does meet notability requirements. Regarding the requirements on the following page:

Massam answers affirmatively to the first two criteria as she is often invited internationally to give guest talks in her field (Austronesian Syntax). She has also been invited as a guest professor at Harvard to teach in her field of expertise. Regarding the third criterion, her work on pseudo noun incorporation (admittedly rather obscure) is virtually a required citation for anyone who works in this area or any closely related area. The fourth criterion is represented weakly by Massam; however, she her work is frequently the discussion of other scholars in her field. Her proposal for pseudo noun incorporation was a novel approach to a difficult problem and has since served as a spring board for other researchers in related fields, which, I believe, meets the 5th criterion. Regarding the 6th criterion, Massam has been awarded Full Professorship at her home institution, a honour which is conferred upon a small number of tenured faculty.

Let me briefly mention why I authored this article in the first place. I came across the following site:

I noticed that many people listed here did not have pages, so I thought it was up to someone who has access to the relevant resources to make pages for people on this list for whom they felt they were qualified to do so. If this was an unwise assumption for me to make, then I apologize.User:Mike Barrie 21:14, November 19, 2006 (UTC).