User talk:Alphachimp/Archive 14
Hi Alphachimp, just a quick heads-up. Thanks & cheers. -- Seed 2.0 08:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Done. alphachimp 16:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Much appreciated. :) -- Seed 2.0 23:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
My AWB Request
editHi Alphachimp, thanks for responding personally on my talk page with regard to my application for AWB. Perhaps you are right, and I should build up a more varied history before I get access. I'm sure I can get along fine without it until then. I will probably apply again at some point in the future. Regards, Jsc83 20:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- OK, sounds good. Don't hesitate to ask if you have any questions. Coincidentally, your vandalism reversion is very helpful. alphachimp 12:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your kind words. We'll no doubt speak again, until then- best wishes. Jsc83 13:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
55
Why cant we all just get along?
edit- 0) âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by El partidario (talk ⢠contribs) 16:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC).
Please restore the article Malt & Barley Editors. If you need more information as to why this "group" is deserving of an individual listing, please contact jrmadtown, the author and lead MBE for 2007-08, and I will happily provide you with such information as required. jrmadtown -at- charter.net
- Your article fails WP:CSD A7, specifically, it's an article without an assertion of notability of the subject, and, to that end, a non-notable group. alphachimp 09:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.
edit |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 18 | 30 April 2007 | 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 06:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Protection of blocking templates
editShouldn't User:Alphachimp/ab, User:Alphachimp/sb, and User:Alphachimp/ub be protected? I believe they were protected before, so I went ahead and reprotected them since they had lost their protection after the move. If they don't need protection, feel free to undo it. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, they should be, they're transcluded into Mediawiki namespace. Thanks, alphachimp 12:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I'm not sure why you made the edit you did to this article. The copyright date on the CD is 1992, not 1995. Thanks! SFTVLGUY2 12:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Someone involved in the production contacted us via the OTRS system, asking to change the date. alphachimp 13:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- The date clearly refers to the CD recording, not the production, and therefore is accurate. Thank you. SFTVLGUY2 15:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
how dare you let your bot
editi am very upset that your stupid bot came into my disscion page and left a warning. i have requested to a wiki admin. to look at this. Politics 1 may 2007
Speedied user page
editRe User:Georgedappilly - content was non-commercial and educational in nature (as well as being in userspace) so speedying it as spam (after only about a day's warning, apparently - inadequate time to allow for action by the user) seems harsh and overzealous. Admittedly, it did look at first glance like it might have commecial, but a note on the user's talk page would have been a good first step - especially as he has been moving his content (at my encouragement) to Appropedia:GEM Technology, as Appropedia has different notability and OR guidelines. --Chriswaterguy talk 04:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Spam is spam, wherever it is. It should have been deleted sooner... alphachimp 06:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
...nonetheless it is good to learn from mistakes.
Except that it wasn't a mistake, certainly not on my part. It was spam, pure and simple. If he wants to promote his pest-control methods, he can take out an ad somewhere.
...but a note on the user's talk page would have been a good first step
You mean like this? Oh, right, I did that. --Calton | Talk 05:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- You really didn't do anything wrong. The userpage was promoting a product or service. alphachimp 06:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- It would be good for both of you to think about WP:CIVIL and WP:NEWBIES, and also read WP:SPAM, noting that the page in question was a user page, not an article. --Chriswaterguy talk 06:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Spam can be on any page, especially a userpage. If you object to the deletion, take it to deletion review. Don't lambaste those who are trying to keep the encyclopedia clear of advertising. alphachimp 07:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Coincidentally, I realize that your message amounted to a civility warning, which, I dare say, seems a little far fetched. To the best of my knowledge, my on-wiki conduct to date has been the model of civility. Of course, it's possible that I've missed something, so, please, do provide me with diffs. alphachimp 07:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- WP:SPAM states: There are three types of wikispam: advertisements masquerading as articles, wide-scale external link spamming, and "Wikipedian-on-Wikipedian" spamming or, "canvassing" (also known as "internal spamming" and "cross-posting").
- Which one applies here?
- Most of WP:SPAM is specifically directed at articles, except for one reference to userpages: Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam. Although the specific links may be allowed under some circumstances, repeatedly adding links will in most cases result in all of them being removed.
- Was it a link that bothered you or the content? (I had the impression it was the content but I may be wrong.) If it was the content, there is no basis in WP:SPAM for deletion.
- If it was a link... the userpage initially contained no links. At the end it may have contained a link to material which had already been transwikied, which is a long way from "wide-scale external link spamming".
- I would rather avoid a deletion review as my concern is not with retrieving the page, but with procedure and how we deal with editors who are acting in good faith, especially newbies. I'm the one who's annoyed (rather than George) and I respect WP:POINT and thus won't pursue it further.
- I would like you to appreciate my concerns, but if not, then I'll leave it, and acknowledge that you're acting in good faith, in spite of strongly disagreeing with your interpretation of spam policy.
- Re civility, I consider it uncivil to delete a userpage created in good faith, especially by a newbie who didn't understand WP:OR. Re our exchange, you have been reasonably civil though I feel too dismissive of a genuine disagreement. --Chriswaterguy talk 07:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't delete the article per WP:SPAM. I deleted it per WP:CSD G11, which specifically specifies: "Pages which exclusively promote a company, product, group, service, or person and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic." Even if that guideline wasn't there, it should have been deleted per wikipedia is not free webhosting or advertising. Userspace is great, but it's not a location to tout your latest product or service. Even if that was not enumerated in the guidelines, it's just common sense. I'm not sure what else I can say. alphachimp 16:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I see that. I was going by the tag and the subsequent discussion about spam, and assumed that WP:SPAM covered everything about spam. I should have noted the talk page message more carefully.
- I was too quick yesterday to ask you to "think about WP:CIVIL" - my apologies. I have fairly strong opinions about the way things should ideally run, especially encouraging newbies and getting people to share their information in the appropriate place, but in no way do I wish to place my own ideas ahead of policy. In an ideal world, and IMO, a note on the talkpage and a period for the person to comply would be better, in the case of good faith, non-commercial information shared in a userspace. But I accept that it's not policy, and understand that it's not really practical when there's a lot of such tasks to do. --Chriswaterguy talk 22:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I respect your opinion, although I disagree (we usually have to run through CAT:CSD in huge swaths. Don't worry about it. I'm sorry if I appeared incivil. alphachimp 00:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Comment - your talk page has too many complaints.
edit
Does anyone ever just say howdy? :) – Rianaठ06:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Tehe, thanks so much for the smile! I really appreciate it. Now...if only you'd stop complaining.... :D alphachimp 06:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Klaus Wiese
editWhy have you decided that Klaus Wiese is not a notable person? He has been an active musician for several decades and has released over 50 albums. There is an article about him in the Germain wikipedia. The figure of Klaus Wiese is comparable to that of Robert Rich and Steve Roach. --Stardancer 06:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I deleted Klaus Wiese, because, asides from saying he's notable and listing all 50 albums (a simple copy and past job), your 2 sentences gave me nothing about his importance. Also, you're welcome to nominate those articles for deletion. alphachimp 06:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I understand. I was under the impression that a wikipedia article can be created in several edits. And, even if I created a stub (do I have to mark it as a stub in this case), other people might come and improve it. I did not understand your comment about nominating articles for deletion. âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by Stardancer (talk ⢠contribs) 06:31, 2 May 2007 (UTC).
- Other people might come and improve it later, but you must, must, must include an assertion of notability in the first draft. Do you have such an assertion? (if so, I'll restore to give you a chance). alphachimp 06:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Can you please explain what an assertion of notablity is? I will now search the guidelies but if you can provide a brief explanation or a link, I will most certainly appreciate it. Thanks. --Stardancer 06:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Other people might come and improve it later, but you must, must, must include an assertion of notability in the first draft. Do you have such an assertion? (if so, I'll restore to give you a chance). alphachimp 06:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I understand. I was under the impression that a wikipedia article can be created in several edits. And, even if I created a stub (do I have to mark it as a stub in this case), other people might come and improve it. I did not understand your comment about nominating articles for deletion. âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by Stardancer (talk ⢠contribs) 06:31, 2 May 2007 (UTC).
Mcscience
editMcScience for discussion, Hello Alphachimp. Have you put my article on McScience for discussion as you promised? Please let me know how I can access it. Thanks. Anil Aggrawal New Delhi, India Anil1956 07:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
AWB Request
editRe: "Out of interest, is your listing on the checkpage just to check your edit count? I might have an even easier method for you. alphachimp 13:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)"
- Actually, no. I was relisting per our conversation here (now archived) last week, because my mainspace edit count has now exceeded 500 and I was hoping for your approval. Interestingly, the "count" link is currently reporting "0 edits," though the count looked correct when I first listed my name, and my "my contributions" page appears intact. I'll check back later to see if the glitch self-corrects, otherwise I'll contact interiot. Regards. Cmichael 18:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- PS. Interiot's tool is currently down. It's being discussed on his talk page. No doubt they'll set it right soon. Cmichael 18:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. I take your point. The count tool is back up now, and shows 500 mainspace edits. When I listed my name on the checkpage a couple of days ago, it was a little higher than that, 502 or 503 or something. Possibly an article or two that I had edited was subsequently deleted? Anyway, I don't want to quibble. It is what it is. Cheers. Cmichael 21:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Allright. I made an edit to Beech Ridge Wind Farm tonight, which brings the Interiot count to 501, and makes my "contributions" page look like yours. Well, a little bit like yours, anyway. Have a look, and have fun! Cmichael 04:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Just moving the section down to get your attention, and hopefully restart the conversation. Where do you want to go from here? Thanks. Cmichael 15:05, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I promise to use it in a way that will make you proud. Cmichael 15:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
--69.221.238.96 19:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Waves transfer energy through a what ???? thank you <<Sue>>
Re: AutoWikiBrowser
editI was being referred to use it by an admin (check User:OhanaUnited/Admin coaching). Clearly you placed too much emphanizism on # of mainspace edit, which I would like to remind you that it should be clean edit record that matters. A vandal would not participate in translation, AfD and other discussion. And a vandal will certainly doesn't want to do things like admin coaching. I am highly disappointed (not blaming on you because you don't write this rule down) that this contradicts WP:Be bold. OhanaUnited 22:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- It should be a "clean edit record"? I'm glad that Firstfron thinks that, but there is more to getting approved for AWB (I do handle nearly all AWB approvals, see this). A user with 3 edits may have a clean edit record, but he has not established himself in the encyclopedia. Obviously, there's some room for interpretation around 500 edits, but generally those with edit counts far below that simply have not established a suitable level of editing for us to approve. For the record, you have less than 200 mainspace edits.
- I find it a bit absurd that you're throwing the "be bold" guideline for editing articles in my face. Being bold indicates that you should fix something that it wrong. According to your admin coaching page, it seems that you only want AWB to increase your edit count so you can become an admin faster. Why do you want to be an admin?
- I never said you were a vandal. I simply believe that you have not established a record as a trusted member of the Wikipedia community. Your comment above only confirms that impression. I'm sorry if this seems mean, but, after hundreds of AWB rejections and acceptances, this response is truly a first. alphachimp 00:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Isn't the whole point of AWB is to fix stuff? Or to accmulate edit counts? I think you put your priority wrong. If you limit a software only to those so-called trusted members then that is already a breach of WP:AGF. The 500 mainspace is a rule of thumb, whereas assume good faith is a policy. I'm not in an arguing mood today, and I'm just about to take a 3-month wikibreak. When I come back I'm pretty sure that there will be another admin who will be too happy to allow me to use it. Have a good day. OhanaUnited 00:43, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, I guarantee you that you will not be approved at your current count. Further, if you want AWB to increase your edit count, you are requesting it for absolutely the wrong reason. alphachimp 00:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- I just noticed that you changed the wording on the page. It looks like you're going to play dirty to win this argument. OhanaUnited 02:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- No, It's a matter of enumerating a common sense rule. See Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#AWB_Approval_Sanity_Check. alphachimp 03:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- For the record, I stated anyone with a clean editing record can apply, not that he or she would be approved. I think there was a misunderstanding here. I fully support the approvals process for this powerful tool, and it's not like the requirements are all that taxing... Firsfron of Ronchester 03:40, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- No, It's a matter of enumerating a common sense rule. See Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#AWB_Approval_Sanity_Check. alphachimp 03:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
AWB Thanks
editDang, you're fast! Thanks for getting me on the user list within, like, 15 seconds or something. <grin> Philippe 04:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Vandilism
editI represent Gloucester High School, and we have recieved numerous reports of IP's being blocked due to vandilism. We encourage our students to take part in active discussions and to contribute their two cents on an article. If you can give us the approximate time, and the IP of the attacker, we will have their internet privledges revoked, as this is in violation of an agreement they signed on first use of the network. Please get back to me at the earliest time.
- TkTech 13:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
- Uh...you're going to need to provide me with some sort of link to the relevant IPs. We're not in the business of permitting schools with vandalism to edit. Cheers, alphachimp 14:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
AWB
editSorry to bother, would it be possible to approve/deny me User:Rambutan (my name is on the page), since I'm anxious to get the program set up before I go away in a day's time. Thanks,--Rambutan (talk) 14:25, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks very much!--Rambutan (talk) 15:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Another AWB
editHello Alphachimp,i have reached my 500 and something edit,and posted my request a couple of days ago,but you havent updated the list,i supossed you're bussy aniway just in case--Andres rojas22 01:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- Im sorry,whats a mainspace?does it mean articles--Andres rojas22 06:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
RFA thanks
edit
|
Thank you, Alphachimp, for your constructive comments in my recent RFA, which passed with 86 support, 8 oppose, and 5 neutral !votes. I will keep in mind all your suggestions and/or concerns, and will try to live up to your standards. Please, if you have any comments or complaints about my actions as an administrator, leave a note on my talk page, and I will respond as soon as I possibly can, without frying my brain, of course. |
|
- Timestamp alphachimp 04:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
CSD
editWhat criteria did you find ?
06:14, 6 May 2007 Alphachimp (Talk | contribs) deleted "Fire at Theodor Mommsen house" (Deleting candidate for speedy deletion per CSD)
- Insufficient context (A1), little or no content other than links (A3), nonsense (g1). To put it quite simply, the article completely fails to assert notability, is poorly formatted, and is difficult to understand. I see that you've already recreated it. alphachimp 07:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your opinion I will tray make it eazier for you to understand Nasz 07:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- --Ps what do you not understand? (it will help me)
- eh, I just put it up for AfD. It's just not written in clear english, and notability is not asserted. alphachimp 07:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Speedy delete on The Western Investor
editI admit I was surprised by your deletion despite my addition of the {{hangon}} tag. You may be interested in the discussion now occurring at User_talk:Dynaflow#The_Western_Investor_.E2.80.93_speedy_delete. Thanks for any input. --Paul Erik 07:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Why? It was a non-notable indie band. To be honest, most are. It seems like some notability is asserted, so the restoration is (at this point) justified, but I think that it should be deleted through AfD. alphachimp 07:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
You are right that most indie bands are non-notable. However: At the time you deleted it, it was asserted in the article (and cited by linking to The R3-30 chart) that the band met criterion #11 in notability on WP:MUSIC. Anyway, the discussion continues at Talk:The Western Investor. --Paul Erik 07:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Honestly, I'm not particularly interested in debating the merits of this band. At this point, I'd rather not get muddled in a quagmire of semantics and notability guidelines open to interpretation. I suspect that we differ quite strongly on our ideas of notability. For what it's worth, if you had bothered to contact me before protesting to the first admin in site, I would have probably restored the article. At this point, however, that is all just chaff in the wind. I won't pursue the debate any further, but I'm more than willing to discuss my deletion here. CHeers, alphachimp 07:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. That is helpful feedback to me. I apologize that I did not contact you first. I was not aware how to find out which admin deleted the article until later when Dynaflow provided the link. So I will know for next time, and I am continuing to learn about the processes on Wikipedia. Cheers, --Paul Erik 08:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Don't worry about it. I'm not upset. I just figured I'd tell you for the future. alphachimp 19:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Zombie article is back from the dead
editAn article you speedydeleted earlier tonight is back from the dead and up for AfD (with bonus rude admins [1]!), and your input would be greatly appreciated there. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Western Investor --Dynaflow 08:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, again. I could really use another admin looking at that AfD; it's starting to get uncivil. People seem to take it personally when you try to AfD an article on a band they like. The shitstorm could grow to monstrous proportions if someone neutral doesn't step in, and my own neutrality has already been severely questioned (after all, why else would I nominate a poorly sourced article for AfD other than because of my deeply-held vendetta against Canadian indie rock [rolls eyes]). --Dynaflow 19:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
71.99. is very problematic user
editHi. There is user using the 71.99.xx.xx dynamic IP adresses. He is still vandalising my talk page. It is not possible to block him simply, because he uses different IP's to attack; it is not only me, who he attacked; he did quite a mess on Czech wikipedia (reverting informations with sources, adding off-topic links to many articles and being rude to many editors), here on en.wiki he vandalised other users' userpages (as logged user with czech pornographic names). You know, reverting my talkpage at least three times a day makes me happy not. So if there are not any other normal editors from the 71.99. subnet, i request to block it whole. We already did a thing like this on cs.wiki, stopping such problems. So thank for help. --Aktron (t|c) 10:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC) "makes me happy not" Yoda I am not. Get a life! Stop moaning! And stop making up things. Start thinking about yourself and your behaving before trying to block Intertubes for whole Florida. 71.99.97.149
- It appears another admin has dealt with it. Let me know if you need any further help. alphachimp 04:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I contested the speedy deletion of this page, and it was still deleted. May I make an attempt to resurrect it? Chubbles 17:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Restored. You have 5 days to establish its notability on that page. Cheers, alphachimp 15:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Please look at the Ellie Caulkins Opera House article for constant vandalism
editJust as with Electronic libretto, the same annonymous editor User talk:62.85.192.81(in spite of 2 editors in favour of keeping the material) keeps on reverting it.
You banned him/her a while ago; please take a look at these articles. I left a "last warning", and he/she has once again reverted.
If Wikipedia doesn't do something about anonymous editors not registering, I'm going to give all this up. Aafter 5000+ contributions, I'm getting fed up with this kind of thing.
"Anyone can edit" = "Anyone can go on vandalizing", which is nonsence. Viva-Verdi 16:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- This is a content dispute. I would prefer not to get involved. Vandalism is something simple like adding profanity to a featured article, not disputing whether or not specific content should be included in an article. I'm sorry that that's not particularly helpful. I'm honestly surprised that you haven't run into any conflicts like this in the last 5000 edits. alphachimp 04:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
vandalism by 131.109.43.30
editHi, I noticed that you blocked User:131.109.43.30 before. Someone at that IP has just vandalized the Schedule I disambig page.--Eloil 18:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Blocked. In the future, please remember to warn and place on WP:AIV alphachimp 04:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 19 | 7 May 2007 | 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 05:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Bot talk page
editHello. The section in the header on User talk:Alphachimpbot that deals with template substitution refers questions to the page User talk, not this talk page. I decided to tell you here instead of fixing it myself because I didn't want the bot to stop because I added to its talk page. WODUP 07:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I fixed it. alphachimp 17:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
counting edits
edit- Thanks for your reply concerning WP Browser. I would like to know how I can count my mainspace edits. Does it count that have a number of contributions in the German Wikipedia? Thank you for your answer.--Hans555 10:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- No, just on en.wiki. You can find mainspace edits on this page. Can you link me to your German contribs? alphachimp 17:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Help
editI would very much appreciate your help on the Samuel Preston article. One IP address keeps insisting on reinserting the "in a huff" phrase that you removed. He always insists I am a Preston fan, which is far from the truth I am just trying to make the article neutral. And another IP address is now causing problems. I think an Admin is now needed to sort this out. Thanks. --UpDown 11:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected. In the future, you can bring these reports to WP:RFPP alphachimp 17:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
You might consider subst'ing that template, as it seems a user accidentally edited the transclusion while meaning to edit their own talk page. I've corrected the error, and moved their message back to their own talk page--VectorPotentialTalk 12:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I usually do, but forgot this time. I've protected the page to prevent that from happening in the future. Thanks, alphachimp 17:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
School Shared IP
edit67.158.110.194 has vandalized several pages recently. I looked into the IP and found that it is from School Administrative Unit #6 in Claremont, New Hampshire. Basically, the host name in a traceroute resolves to k12.sau6.nh, which is the IP of an educational institution and a shared IP. Not to mention, that all the incidents from this IP address show no common ground. Where as with one person they usually stick with something they're overly passionate about. Just thought I'd let you know. --Amaraiel 22:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Blythewood High School
editI have a proposition for you. I am a legitimate editor, and I believe that while there are people who will vandalize pages from the schools IP Range There are legitimate editors. I would like to propose that I be a Vandal Sentry for the IP range of Blythewood High School. In exchange for the school to be unblocked, I will personally take responsibility for any vandalization done by the school. If this seems acceptable to you, please let me know. --Amaraiel 13:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Reading between the lines, it sounds like you're a student at this school. Could you please link me to the relevant IP? I block a lot of schools. alphachimp 17:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I am currently a student at the school (Class of '07) But I do know that as a new school Blythewood doesn't need to be so villafied already and with new students and generations up and coming, I would like to keep the reputation clear. If I could, I'll find it out tommorow. Though you may be able to find out. The IP address resolves to a server with rs2 or rsd2 in it. And the schools Network IP is 10.11.1.16 (though I doubt thats their public IP) --Amaraiel 19:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- It's not so much an issue of vilification. It's likely an issue of a long term pattern of vandalism originating from your school. I really need to see that IP address in order to make any determination. alphachimp 20:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I know it's a long term thing. I'll leave the IP address on your talk page tommorow morning. Thanks
- It's not so much an issue of vilification. It's likely an issue of a long term pattern of vandalism originating from your school. I really need to see that IP address in order to make any determination. alphachimp 20:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I am currently a student at the school (Class of '07) But I do know that as a new school Blythewood doesn't need to be so villafied already and with new students and generations up and coming, I would like to keep the reputation clear. If I could, I'll find it out tommorow. Though you may be able to find out. The IP address resolves to a server with rs2 or rsd2 in it. And the schools Network IP is 10.11.1.16 (though I doubt thats their public IP) --Amaraiel 19:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
editThanks for the assist in blocking that school IP. I appreciate it. âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by Amaraiel (talk ⢠contribs) 04:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC).--Amaraiel 04:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Troy Howard Middle School
editHey I share a school IP adress and my other user was blocked, but I didn't do anything and they accused me for vandilizing. Hey can you help me please? --Abubblegum824 12:00, 10 May 2007 (UTC) Thanks
Page Problem
I recently made a page which I can find but when doing a search is not coming up. How long should that take to be visible?
- I'm not sure, can you provide me with a link to the page? It was probably deleted. As for the school IP, could you link me to said IP? Thanks, alphachimp 23:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Brand History Page
editI recently submitted an article on a brand and it is unsearchable. Could you let me know how long it should take for my page to appear? Here is my page Stitch and Bitch âThe preceding unsigned comment was added by Sewfastseweasy (talk ⢠contribs) 15:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC).
- Looks a lot like spam to me, but I'll leave it up for you to check out. Nothing notable claimed. Rklawton 17:06, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- And deleted as such. Thanks for the quick analysis, Rklawton. alphachimp 23:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Note re: Business (from Alphachimp)
editI'm incredibly busy right now, and may be for several weeks. Please be assured that I've read all of your messages, and will respond once time presents itself. In the meantime, have an extremely pleasant weekend. Cheers, alphachimp 20:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
IP address may need blocking again
editAt the end of January, you posted a notice that the anonymous address 70.247.31.51, registered to John Paul II High School, was being blocked for repeated disruptive edits. A user or users at that same address made several personal-attack edits to Cheese (recreational drug) this week. I wanted to mention it so that an extension of the block could be considered if this keeps up. Thanks. Lawikitejana 03:37, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've blocked the school until September. Thanks for the report. My apologies for the delay in responding. alphachimp 23:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Your very welcome semi-protection of Poseidon has run out and the vandalism has immediately started up again. --Wetman 01:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've protected it again. Thanks for the report. alphachimp 23:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 20 | 14 May 2007 | 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 08:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. I was searching for The Retrosic earlier today, and noticed that the article was correctly deleted last year. I've just recreated it using the original as a basis, but ensured that it now asserts and demonstrates notability.
Just thought I should point this out to you, as the deleting admin. I'd be interested to know if you think anything still needs to be changed. :) Daveydweeb (chat/review!) 06:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
- The article looks fine. My apologies on the delay in responding. Cheers, alphachimp 23:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
There appears to be a concerted effort by two editors to white-wash the North Korea article. This includes removing references to "communist" or similar entries in the info-box "Government type" category field, and removing a rather telling satellite image that illustrates the utter poverty in which this nation exists. I wouldn't be surprised if these two were socks and/or paid agents of the NK government - it's that bad. I've posted a note in the country project page and gained the interest of one editor and no opposition. However, changes to the article are reverted back on sight and talk page messages gently berate those who value a little realism for not knowing what they're talking about. Since the POV pushing is being conducted by two editors, they aren't getting hung up on 3RR - and indvidual editors who have noticed this and tried fixing it are simply being pushed out. Since this is primarily a POV pushing type content dispute, it's not a simple matter to untangle. I'm not getting my shorts in a bunch over this since I trust Wikipedians to sort things out in the long run. However, I was wondering if you might have some suggestions that might help speed things along. Do you know of any editors who might be interested in reviewing an article and a couple of months worth of history? I'm open to other suggestions as well. Rklawton 16:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hrm. Sorry for the long delay in replying. To be honest, this seems like fairly cut and dry POV pushing, just like you said. I'm not familiar with any editors specifically interested in investigating the histories, and, to be honest, I'm not quite sure where I'd ask. Perhaps it would be a good idea to lock the article to force discussion on the talk page? alphachimp 04:42, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
-2007-05-19T11:06:00.000Z-Image:Christmas_tree-7534301.jpg){kind=link}
Hello Alphachimp, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Christmas tree-7534301.jpg) was found at the following location: User talk:Alphachimp/Archive 9. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 11:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
-2007-05-19T11:06:00.000Z-Image:Christmas_tree-7534301.jpg){kind=link}
Vandal?
editWHO-AOH, BLACK BETTY, BAM-BA-LAM! (talk · contribs) made no edits that were vandalism. As for length,
Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington WHO-AOH, BLACK BETTY, BAM-BA-LAM!
So... I would personally suggest an unblock in hopes of constructive contributions, but you're the admin here :) GracenotesT §
- It was his deleted userpage at [2]. Perhaps I'm just newbie biting? alphachimp 03:23, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- OK, unblocked. I see how this could be misinterpreted. alphachimp 03:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. I hope that he contributes positively. As for his userpage—wasn't that related to a username change? (Perhaps I should have called myself "Stuck in 1977") GracenotesT § 03:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Restored. Wow. I guess I really took that differently than you did. alphachimp 03:43, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Eh, now I'm a bit more dubious of his intentions. I HEREBY AWARD A BARNSTAR TO ALPHACHIMP (talk · contribs) o_O Not to say they're the same people, but if so, you can't win 'em all... GracenotesT § 03:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. I hope that he contributes positively. As for his userpage—wasn't that related to a username change? (Perhaps I should have called myself "Stuck in 1977") GracenotesT § 03:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- OK, unblocked. I see how this could be misinterpreted. alphachimp 03:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
The page you deleted title Ryism
editwhy did you delete that page it is a real religion that we are trying to spread....please reconsider —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nksd (talk • contribs)
- Unfortunately, Wikipedia is not an acceptable vehicle by which to promote your religion. Check on WP:NOT. alphachimp 03:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I got it...Can I create the page Nksd...It is a school in washington State...
- Maybe, but how about checking if the page already exists, first? alphachimp 03:34, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
AWB
editI'm going to approve you, but please be careful with your contributions. Thanks, alphachimp 05:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! I appreciate it. I'm actually a C# developer for a living. If you need help on the project, please let me know, it would be my pleasure. Wikidan829 05:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Great. Thanks again. Wikidan829 05:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Regarding 64.81.103.245 block
editI thought that IP addresses are never blocked indefinitly. So is this valid or did I miss something? I changed the temporary block notice to indefinite per: [3] -- Hdt83 Chat 05:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- I seem to have been overzealous and to have forgotten to change the block length. I'm really messing up a lot tonight. Thanks for pointing that out, alphachimp 07:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi Alphachimp! I wanted to let you know that a bot you requested, AccReqBot, has (finally) been approved! If you have any feature requests or if the bot is doing something wrong, feel free to contact me! --ST47Talk 11:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Sentence Variety-- deletion?
editWhat can I do to make my article meet standards? Jessica DeVoto 13:58, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- I deleted it because the article was nonsense, and completely useless to Wikipedia. Why do you want to create it? Check out WP:NOT. alphachimp 17:05, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Re: Sprotected2
editSee here. Cheers. --MZMcBride 03:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 21 | 21 May 2007 | 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 04:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Overclockersclub page deleted
editI click on "why my page was deleted" and read why, but i'm not understanding it.
I'd love an explanation as to why the Overclockersclub.com page was deleted
05:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC) sdy284
- It's an article without an assertion of notability of the subject. Also, it was purely promotional. alphachimp 05:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Overclockersclub page purely promotional?
editwhat about these guys: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardocp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anandtech
tech websites that do reviews... how is this different from us?? sorry if this wasn't the correct way to respond to your reply, but i'm not sure how to do that
Sdy284 05:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC) sdy284
- Uh, your article was a self-written, promotional disaster. Have you actually seen it? alphachimp 05:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
blah
editso you're not allowed to write your own page for a website that gets over 700,000 unique page hits a month?
I would like you to point out what parts of the page were a "disaster"
here is our "about us" page: http://www.overclockersclub.com/pages/about_us/
we're not just some tiny start up tech site
Sdy284 05:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC) sdy284
- Wikipedia is not your own free webhost. The entire thing was a mess. The difference between the two articles linked above and your article is that theirs are well-written, not self-promotional, and give a clear idea of why their forum is notable. Check out WP:WEB. alphachimp 05:15, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
fine
editok then, undelete it, and i'll be happy to go through it with you and remove any "self promotional" bits Sdy284 05:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC) sdy284
- Let's start by making sure that you meet our notability guidelines. That'll save you a lot of headache down the line. Have you appeared in any external (print, preferably) publications or websites? (Check out WP:WEB). alphachimp 05:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
OCC notable?
edithttp://www.overclockersclub.com/pages/occinthenews/
here is a small publication, you may of heard of them, Foxnews.com? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKczWowPU4o
and i would like to re-create the page & make it more "encyclopedic", but it won't let me
Sdy284 05:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC) sdy284
- It won't let you recreate it because I have blocked recreation. Forum article deletions typically present significant issues for the deleting administrator, so the protection was preemptive.
- There really isn't a need to become upset. I'm fully aware of Fox News. It seems as if your site may meet WP:WEB. I've emailed you the article. Basically, it'd be a good idea to nuke the entire staff section. Everywhere you refer to your site as "great" is inappropriate for Wikipedia. You need to write it from a neutral, critical tone. Follow the tune of the two articles that you linked above. You can preview your changes by clicking on an Wikipedia page and "show preview". When you're done, just email me the new version, we'll go over it, and you can recreate it. alphachimp 05:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, that might be a little bit much of a hassle. I'm recreating the article at User:Alphachimp/Sandbox1. Feel free to edit it there. alphachimp 05:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- thank you, so i take it once i make my edits, then you have to approve it? and also, why is it that hardocp and anandtech are allowed to list their staff members and we are not? Sdy284 05:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)sdy284
- I honestly don't think it's appropriate for them either, but you're welcome to do so...let's just try to make it as WP:NPOV as possible. I've already made some changes. They're not law, and you're welcome to change them back. I just want to improve this article as much as possible while making it appropriate for an encyclopedia. alphachimp 05:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ok then, I'm adding it back in. I don't understand why it's not "encyclopedic" to list who the staff are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft#Corporate_structure Microsoft does it, why not us? (or hardocp or whoever)Sdy284 05:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)sdy284
- Because, to be quite frank, none of you are actually notable, and it's more of a vanity to list yourselves here. alphachimp 05:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- Point taken, but if you surveyed 100,000 people, would they be able to name any 5 of those "notable" Microsoft corporate people? (besides Bill Gates) Sdy284 05:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC) sdy284
- Probably not, but the same people probably wouldn't be able to find North America on a map. I do think there's a little bit of a difference between being an exec of a Fortune 500 company and being a forum mod, if only in the payscale. I'm probably going to sign off now, but I'd encourage you to work on it some more tonight. If you do have forum members experienced in editing Wikipedia, it might be a good idea to ask them to come in and improve it. For what it's worth, I think a lot of your content should be removed from the article. I take the AnandTech article as the best example.
- I'm moving the article back to the original location, if only to make it easier for your users to improve it. alphachimp 05:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
2 changes
editOn your user page you have a little bit that shows two random changes and has you verify whether they're vandalism or not. I think that's pretty cool, anyway I can put that on my page? Thanks Wikidan829 04:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. It is a Wiki, after all. Coincidentally, that was originally from User:Gurch. alphachimp 04:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Userpage
editActually - no idea - uhoh I hope there's someway to get it back ...danielfolsom 11:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Please explain your reason for semi-protecting Oregon at its Talk:Oregon page. I am surprised that you would not do so before the semi-protection.
In addition, I hope you will consider reversing the semi-protection. Beyond its apparently arbitrary nature, this semi-protection comes at a particularly bad time for our Wikiproject. In the last couple of weeks, we have attracted some excellent new talent, and a spirit of collaboration and mentoring unmatched in my 1.5 years on Wikipedia has emerged. Welcoming new users is key to sustaining that spirit, and I believe semi-protection damages our efforts every minute that it is sustained.
-Pete 19:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've responded there. alphachimp 20:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining more fully. I'd like to continue to pursue a change, but am unclear on the procedure. Wikipedia:Protection policy clearly states that pre-emptive protection is not allowed, and since I understand that this is an unusual case, I am personally willing to put a significant amount of time into fending off vandalism on a case-by-case basis. But I don't know where to best make this case. Any assistance would be welcome. -Pete 21:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thing is, you won't be there 24/7. I ordinarily don't protect things preemptively, but in this case it did seem the right move (I guess WP:IAR in a way). The issue was discussed and this move was actually suggested (along with this article) over the admin IRC channel. alphachimp 22:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know, of course I can't do it alone - isn't that the beauty of Wikipedia? But I am willing to put in an extra personal effort. I believe it will be of value, at minimum, to have the reasoning repeated in the public sphere, so I nominated the decision for reversal here. I would like to add that as an instance of the Ignore All Rules "policy," clear communication of the action and the reasoning behind it is of particular importance. One other thing - you referred at one point to "my" article. I don't own the article, I am just trying to help Wikipedia achieve its potential by staying true to its expressed values. -Pete 22:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Just to comment, Pete, during the hours immediately following the Colbert Report, I reverted around 200 edits of vandalism. True, they weren't all related, but a good proportion of them were. Colbert's target tonight was librarians, the Spanish Wikipedia, and, to a lesser extent, Elephants, which was his first on-air attack. There was no way of predicting exactly what he would hit, but we did realize that he was going to mention past targets. It was actually suggested by other admins, and agreed to by Jimbo, that we protect Colbert articles. You can wave policies in my face all day, and I completely understand that I bypassed them in protecting your article.
- Pete, on a daily basis I respond to roughly 40 emails from members of the public complaining about vandalism on Wikipedia. The comments are predictable, and many people don't want to use our site any more (our most vehement reactions often come from educators). Anything we can do to prevent vandalism, or another major PR incident (like Siegenthaler), we're going to do, but we do have to maintain a certain level of balance between allowing contributors and blocking vandals. You feel that I went to far, and I certainly respect (but disagree with) that opinion.
- As a sidenote, comments like this indicate a fairly severe lack of decorum. I'd really suggest you avoid mocking other editors. Thanks, alphachimp 07:37, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have no comment on the initial decision, because I don't know exactly what it was, or what the reasoning was. As you have said, it was conducted in private, and if a transcript is available, I don't know where it is. So your justifications of that decision are wasted on me; I can't evaluate what I can't see. So let's leave that part out of it.
- You have characterized my actions poorly on several occasions, and I don't appreciate it. You say I can "wave policies in your face all day," when I was clear from the beginning what my argument was, and invoked policy only in the hopes of providing some common ground, and inviting you to explain your reasoning on a foundation that is shared, to some degree, by all Wikipedians.
- You have referred on two occasions to "your" article, when I have made it clear that my concern is for the impact on the community, not for an inappropriate personal investment in any specific article.
- You expressed familiarity with "all the arguments," dismissing the value of considering them in light of the situation at hand.
- You made assurances that your action would "actually improve" the Oregon article, and that the semi-blocking of the Oregon article was "clearly in the best interest of Wikpedia," in the course of dismissing my position. You were proven wrong, but did not acknowledge that. In fact, your user page all but declares a personal policy of never apologizing. (emphasis on gratuitous adjectives mine.)
- As for your own actions, you made a change without explanation and without holding off on execution until the show aired; you justified it with namedropping and reference to private discussions to which non-admins do not have access; you talk about all your hard work as though your the only one who does it. After all that, you advise me to work on my decorum. I will consider that advice, and I hope you will consider mine:
- When you find "all the arguments" too boring to rehash when "ignoring all rules," and when all the emails you respond to start to look the same, it's probably time for a wikibreak.
- You're now wasting my time and wasting yours. If you wish to pursue this further, pursue a formal dispute resolution avenue. And, actually, there are no Wikibreaks coming in the near future. alphachimp 20:40, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- On reflection, I'm willing to accept that I've been more difficult to deal with than necessary. I don't think it's as bad as you say, but I definitely could have done better. I'm going to step away from this for the weekend, and I hope that we will both be more inclined to move to some kind of resolution after that. I would like to take another crack at explaining myself though, as I still feel strongly that I have something to say that it would be useful to you to hear. -Pete 02:38, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- OK Pete, that sounds fine. (Please don't take this as sarcastic.) I really don't think any resolution is needed beyond what has already happened, but I'll participate in whatever you start. Have a good weekend, alphachimp 03:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
TeckWiz's RFA
editHey Alphachimp. I'd just like to thank you for commenting in my RFA. I know it's been a month since it, but I have been very busy. By the way, I'm now User:R. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 22:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks buddy. I actually got your email :). alphachimp 00:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
National Center for Jewish Film
editI spent several hours posting information about our non-profit organization on our Wikipedia page-- the heading had been placed by someone else and the information present was slightly incorrect and very incomplete. As this was my first time editing a Wikipedia page i have have made several errors and for this i apologize.
But i awoke this morning to see that ALL of the information i had placed on the page yesterday--this history of our Center, mission statement, activities, background on our founder and our collections--had been deleted.
I received this message.
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to National Center for Jewish Film, was not constructive and has been reverted or removed. The article is blatant advertising and has had an article for speedy deletion tag placed on it. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.Stealthrabbit Say it, baby, say it! 23:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
This cannot be what Wikipedia is about. We are a 30-year struggling non-profit organization trying to explain our history and what we do. In a flash, without warning, by an unknown person (who seems to be in middle scholl), our information (and my work) was deleted. This cannot be acceptable. Again, if i made errors in posting, I am sorry and would be happy to alter my text or presentation. The information i included about our Center was not unlike that posted about other archives on their pages.
Please advise. I cannot afford to waste time editing our page, if it is to be summarily deleted by someone who had no knowlege of our organization.
Lisa Rivo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisarivo (talk • contribs)
- I've responded on your talk. alphachimp 00:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
I have been nominated to be an admin. If you support me, please indicate so on the RFA page. Thank you.
Thanks Man
editThanks man! I figured the best thing to do was to igore him and let him hang himself instead of repling to him Ãon Insanity Now! 03:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Request for link fix (CIA publications)
edit(This is based on a similar request here: Wikipedia:Bot_requests/Archive_8#Create_a_bot_to_update_CIA_World_Factbook_links.)
I was wondering if you could set Alphachimpbot on this task:
Replace all mentions (under References, Notes, etc.) of the broken link http://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/<rest of URL> (or the same, except with https instead of http) with https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/<rest of URL>
Also, any other links to https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications should be replaced with https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/. I suspect they have done significant further restructuring they might have done to the section (or site, even), so that's something to check out. (See [4].)
Many thanks in advance. - Thehotelambush 23:12, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
orphan film
editwhy do you say that 'orphan film' "seems to be a neologism"?
Streible 02:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Orphan film was not deleted for being a neologism, it was deleted for appearing to have been copied directly from another site. Are you saying that you wrote it yourself? alphachimp 04:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Mousetrap racer
editI'm sorry, that page was still being updated because I haven't finished building it. Please restore the page. any probs please notify me.
thxs :D
Starwars1234567890 03:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, but Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. It's not a place to host web guides on how to do something. alphachimp 04:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 22 | 28 May 2007 | 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 05:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Your recent bot approvals [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Alphachimpbot 8|request]] has been Speedy. Please see the [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Alphachimpbot 8|request page]] for details. When the bot flag is set it will show up in this log. --ST47Talk 10:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Ultralingua deletion
editHi,
You deleted an entry that I created about Ultralingua, indicating that it was advertising. But the entry seemed quite harmless, just explaining company info using readily available information. There was no promotional text -- just a description of when the company was founded and what it does. Why is that any different from, say, an entry on Milton Bradley, the game company?
Yours,
Confused.
- Could you please link me to where the article used to be? Thanks. alphachimp 04:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
About a message
editHi Alphachimp,
I'm saying this for my school. You sent my school ip a message about vandalising/experimenting on some pages. We wish to apologise, we will not abuse wikipedia again. Could you please remove any messages/warnings/blocks.
With regards,
58.84.200.3 02:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thanks
editThanks Alphachimp for dealing with vanalism on my page!!! It is appreciated. BTW, awsome user page! =-D -- Penubag 09:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:BabyItsYou.jpg
edit
Thanks for uploading Image:BabyItsYou.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted the page once and then reverted it back. I also deleted past revisions of the image. I'm not quite sure how I uploaded anything... alphachimp 15:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I really need your help....
editAlphachimp, form one user to another, I am requesting that something be done about NE2. He needs to realize what he is doing to the project and if he continues, the project will self-destruct. I hope I can get some help and fast because as I am leaving Wikipedia, probably ofr a while, I need something o be done about him if no one else can step up to the plate. Thanks, --Imdanumber1 (talk · contribs) 16:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! --Wikihermit(Speak) £ 03:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
NYC bus route templates nominated for deletion
editI have nominated Template:NYC bus and its related templates for deletion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:NYC bus. Bus links are now directed to lists of bus routes and some are directed to articles, so the template gives superfluous information and sometimes results in bus connections sections being larger than other sections. Therefore, I feel these templates have to be deleted. You may also be interested in other deletion matters and other issues at WT:NYCPT. Thanks. Tinlinkin 04:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.
edit |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 23 | 4 June 2007 | 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 06:57, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
AWB Check Page
editHi there, I've been waiting to be approved for using AWB, but the check page has not been updated in several days. I noticed on the requests page it said to post here if it had not been updated for a few days, so here is the post! :) Cheers â ARC GrittTALK 12:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- I will second that, I posted on 5th June, and its now 18:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC), Thanks Stwalkerster talk review
- Same Flubeca (t) 22:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Same, posted on the 8th, it is now the 13th. --Andrew Hampe Talk 01:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Same Flubeca (t) 22:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- I will second that, I posted on 5th June, and its now 18:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC), Thanks Stwalkerster talk review
Oregon/Colbert followup
editHi Alphachimp, I've been meaning to get back to you about the Oregon semi-protect fiasco. I know you feel the issue is "over," and I tend to agree with you, but I hope you'll indulge me a few words first.
Basically, I came to the conclusion that I did get more aggressive than the situation called for. I wasn't hearing much response from you, and I developed the notion that you were an exceptionally thick-skinned, unresponsive sort, and that the only way to be heard was to "yell." When you expressed such frustration in the mediation request, it honestly came as a big surprise to me - up till then I had thought I was barely on your radar. That's why I stepped back from the situation for a while, because I realized my perceptions were way out of whack. So I'd like to apologize for that.
I hope that at some point in the process, you recognized that your initial semi-protect came about an hour after an explicit agreement about how to redirect some misdirected newbie energy in a positive direction. Those people have all moved on; I guess we'll never know whether or not they would have stayed.
Anyway, I'm sorry for the stridency of my tone earlier, but I hope that in some small way, my request that unilateral admin action is best accompanied by extra efforts at communication got through.
Happy editing, -Pete 19:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Block of 70.18.90.211
editI just found out that you blocked User:70.18.90.211 on April 20, 2007 for six months. The block is not an anonymous only block, and the IP is a shared IP, so the softer block would be necessary. If you get this message, please reply on my talk page. NHRHS2010 Talk 01:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- done. alphachimp 01:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well done. NHRHS2010 Talk 01:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 24 | 11 June 2007 | 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 02:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Response to your comments
editThank you for taking the time to respond to my request. I understand why you declined my request and maybe when I get better at all of this, I will request at a more appropriate time. Thanks again for the courtesy of telling me, --Crohnie 11:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. Now I feel better about your comments. NHRHS2010 Talk 00:51, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- lol. ok... nice template. alphachimp 15:01, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
I just made my 5000th edit today. NHRHS2010 Talk 02:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 25 | 18 June 2007 | 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 08:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Request that some admin/bureaucrat may please vet AWB user requests
editHi Alphachimp,
Would you please vet / get someone to vet the AWB user request page please. Thanks in advance. AshLin 08:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
AWB
editWhat are the "necessary editing skills" part supposed to mean. I understand WP very well. --Evilclown93(talk) 22:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- You might do well asking Winhunter, seeing as it was his comment, not mine. alphachimp 01:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello
editSir,
I will apply for it in the future.Thanks for dropping the message.
- ) ------ ARUNKUMAR P.R 07:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 26 | 25 June 2007 | 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 07:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Some ignorance
editSome people have the stupidest unblock reasons, not to mention the stupidest username. —« ANIMUM » 15:37, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
HBC AIV Helperbots are dead
edit—Wknight94 (talk) 21:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
- Fixed, per discussion on my talk. Alpha, see the e-mail I sent to the helperbot mailing list for a fix. —Krellis (Talk) 23:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
AWB
editMy name has been on the request for approval page for several days--Java7837 23:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I've approved you instead. —« ANIMUM » 00:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 27 | 2 July 2007 | 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 07:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Out of order
editHBC AIV helperbot2 inserts comments to AIaV before prior comments. It would be better if it commented in-turn. —SlamDiego←T 20:50, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- sorry, I'm not the one to speak with about bot technical issues. Try Krellis alphachimp 20:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 28 | 9 July 2007 | 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 07:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
AWB Backlog
editJust wanted to let you know that you've got about a week's worth of backlog at the AWB CheckPage. — MusicMaker 18:25, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 29 | 16 July 2007 | 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 19:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
BOT gone crazy ... must be destroyed!!!!!
editI fear your BOT seems to have got the wrong end of the strick when adding the Wikipedia:WikiProject European Union template {{European Union}} to articles related to the European Song Contest. The Song Contest is run by the European Broadcasting Union which has no relationship with the European Union, other than having a similar name. The template of Wikipedia:WikiProject Eurovision {{EurovisionNotice}} should have been added instead. Caveat lector 15:35, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I completely fail to see or understand your point here. I suspect at the time my bot tagged these articles, which you have provide no examples of, such a template did not exist. At the time I was tagging the articles I responded to a specific request by another Wikipedia user. You can check my talk page archives for that. As for the bot being "destroyed", this sentiment is entirely ridiculous. It is software I elect to run at arbitrary intervals. alphachimp 19:20, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- I was joking about your bot being destroyed. -:) The use of your bot was requested by User:Parker007 a sockpuppet of User:Endgame1. See: User talk:Alphachimp/Archive 12#Tagging Bot for European Union Project. Both accounts have now been blocked indefinitely. As for an example, the song 't Is Genoeg and much of the rest of the caetgory Category:Start-Class European Union articles are Eurovision related articles that shouldn't be there. To put my request more clearly. Any article in Category:Eurovision songs and sub-cats should have the {{European Union}} template removed. While you're at it, putting the {{EurovisionNotice}} template in it's place would appear to make sense as that's where they appear to belong. In short the bot edits need to be undone, preferably by the bot, as the request (nothing you did) was essentially vandalism and/or gross inaccuracy. Caveat lector 19:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, I do find it somewhat strange that someone would act in the bad interest of Wikipedia like that. If you can show me a discussion indicating that this is indeed consensus, I can go through and de-tag the articles in question. alphachimp 20:40, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- Well it is possible that s/he was just misguided. I posted the matter to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject European Union#... next step the World.21. For more you might note the Eurovision article itself European Song Contest#Participation where it says, 'despite the "Euro" in "Eurovision" — nor has it anything to do with the European Union.' The same point is made in the lead section on the European Broadcasting Union article. Caveat lector 21:09, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 30 | 23 July 2007 | 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 05:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Further to Eurovision articles discussion
editFurther to our discussion User talk:Alphachimp/Archive 14#BOT gone crazy ... must be destroyed.21.21.21.21.21. Do you think I don't have enough consensus for a revert? If it's just that either you or your bot are out of action, I'll have a go at another bot. Caveat lector 21:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I've been busy in real life, but it looks like only one person responded to agree with you. alphachimp 17:26, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry to interrupt, as the one person who responded; please see WP:EU scope, Eurovision is outside the EU and hence the WP. - J Logan t: 20:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Information about Don Buchla
editI found some information about Robert Moog having made synthesizers and parts for Raymond Scott’s synthesizers. Robert worked with his father and Raymond in 1956 making synths, circuits, and thurmonds. Would this make it years before Don Buchla made synths? Sites I have found this information on, as well as an issue of Electronic Musician. The links are http://raymondscott.com/moog.html and http://raymondscott.com/em.html under wall of sound. The 3 page article published in electronic musician http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_circle_machines_sequencers/index.html second page.
--Fractal123 05:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)fractal123--Fractal123 05:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
editApologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 31 | 30 July 2007 | 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 23:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 32 | 6 August 2007 | 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 08:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Meetup
edit:( -- Y not? 00:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm disappointed too. We'll probably schedule something else during the fall, so let us know if you'll be in the area then. Regards, Newyorkbrad 00:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Fear the Boot
editThe podcast was recently nominated for an ENnie award (http://www.ennieawards.com/2007noms-1.html). Does this qualify as notability? Taladel 01:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 33 | 13 August 2007 | 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 19:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
The bot's been off for over an hour now, is everything all right? ˉˉanetode╦╩ 04:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- Still down, and we're doing it manually, but I miss the bot. :( - Philippe | Talk 15:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
The bot's been off for over an hour now, is everything all right? ˉˉanetode╦╩ 04:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- Still down, and we're doing it manually, but I miss the bot. :( - Philippe | Talk 15:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- The bot will remain offline until Saturday due to internet connectivity issues. alphachimp 03:06, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 34 | 20 August 2007 | 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 04:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Blythewood High School
editHey Alphachimp, This school has officially started classes and henceforth the research will soon begin. I am still interested in trying to unblock the school keep a watch on it's activity. If your still interested please email me at aeternum22501@gmail.com. P.S. The link to the schools IP is under your May 2007 Archive. --Amaraiel 13:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Just a heads up that Andrew Saul (vice-Chairman of the MTA) has been nominated for featured article status here. Any input, comment and suggestions would be greatly appreciated, there is not that much info on him as it relates to the MTA, and being an !expert, I'm not quite sure how well I can flesh it out. Please feel free to comment and/or improve the article. Thanks! MrPrada 21:22, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
I am writing to request that you re-list the page related to my podcast. I currently have a page listing my bio here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Christianson and the Wiki link to the information on the podcast itself is a dead since this page was removed. Your rationale for de-listing was cited as CSD A7 - Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. My podcast is listened to by over 25,000 people worldwide each week. I would argue that is "significant". The show provides entertainment value on par or equal to that of other radio and video shows that are listed elsewhere on Wikipedia. Please reconsider your decision to remove this content.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phylaxis (talk • contribs) 05:27, August 26, 2007 (UTC)
Fear the Boot
editDid you discover anything? Taladel 05:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 35 | 27 August 2007 | 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 05:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Why?
editWhy did you delete the page of Julia Kendell? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophie272007 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
inconsistent
editWe have been asked many times about why the Humboldt State University Marching Lumberjacks are not included on Wikipedia. Last year, an alumnus has twice contributed a page to Wikipedia to have it deleted. Also, a link to the band was removed from Humboldt State University's Wikipedia page. --- RE: 17:39, 12 December 2006 Alphachimp deleted " Marching Lumberjacks" (Deleting page - reason was: "Article about a non-notable individual, band, service, website or other entity" using NPWatcher) ---
I fail to understand the logic behind this decision to delete Wikipedia articles about the Humboldt State University Marching Lumberjacks band. Clearly, Wikipedia editors have chosen to include the following bands:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_Band http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dartmouth_College_Marching_Band http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marching_Owl_Band http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_Precision_Marching_Band
I feel you are discriminating against the Marching Lumberjacks, because it represents a small university, and is not associated with fame, money and prestige. ( "non-noteable" )
But size/fame should not not matter! The Marching Lumberjacks will be celebrating its 40th anniversary next year. It has been on national television at least twice (including a Jay Leno promotion spot) and was pictured in National Geographic magazine. Even tho the band is small, it manages to be a legend in its own zone.
Also, having the information out there in Wikipedia will really help us locate former members for our next reunion.
Our alumnus would like to submit an article again-- following, of course, the constrictions of the Wikipedia content. I'm asking that you choose to not delete it this time.
137.150.33.46 17:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Grace Kerr HSU 1990
Oh please, please, please, get involved in this matter!!!
editSorry, I must learn not to act so frantically, but I really am eager for something to be done about this: I want images to be uploaded to Iggy Arbuckle, and I therefore am seeking the help of as many administrators as I can. Please say you'll help to improve the article! Please, please, please! (There I go again!) Wilhelmina Will 02:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Humboldt State University Marching Lumberjacks
editAlphachimp,
I understand that you deleted a Wikipedia article for the Humboldt State University Marching Lumberjacks due to a question about notability, and removed a link to the band from the University's Wikipedia page.
This is from Wikipedia guidelines regarding notability for a musical group:
"Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a compilation album, etc."
This is from the Wikipedia page on the Jim Carrey film, The Majestic:
"The band seen and heard as the "Lawson High School Band" was the Humboldt State University Marching Lumberjacks."
Now of course you could delete that too, but I hope you can see your way clear to un-deleting the article on the band.
In addition to the aforementioned note on The Majestic page, there have been numerous print articles about the Marching Lumberjacks. In addition to supporting HSU's athletic events, the student-run band performs at many community events - so many that the band sometimes splits to appear simultaneously at different venues. The band has appeared on TV, been heard on the radio, and for nearly 40 years has most certainly been part of the local scene in the Pacific Northwest, with plenty of verifiable documentation.
Please un-delete the Humboldt State University Marching Lumberjacks Wikipedia article.
Notoriety 04:19, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Notoriety
Marching since 1984
hey!
editAlways looking to learn more - thanks! Ceabaird 07:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
You really need to see this one my friend....
editRoyal Couple edit their own wikipedia entry --Amaraiel 13:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 36 | 3 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| 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. HermesBot 01:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I thought you should know that 216.11.23.2 has vandalized another page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_T._Madden&action=history
Thanks, Brad Halls 20:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 37 | 10 September 2007 | 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 06:24, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Iron On deletion
editHi -- I reckon Iron On are borderline notable, based on various articles about them http://www.rockus.com.au/common/archives/interviews/ironon.html and their nomination for a CMW indie under "favourite new international artist/group" (http://www.cmw.net/cmw2007/media_details.asp?media_ID=31). Thanks, Sean Stewart —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.27.56.15 (talk) 04:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
powell truck
editi had a neighbor in mill valley, calif that had a green powell truck. not sure of the year, but it was in the 50's. we used to take it to the beach to go fishing. it was a neat vehicle, very functional and rugged
bill
bill.mcbride@gmail.com
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.15.87.184 (talk) 21:51, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 38 | 17 September 2007 | 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 02:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Banned
editLooking at wikipedia I am interested to see I have been blocked for making comments I did not write.(I have never written on this site)So I have decided to ban you from the sea. Do not enter the sea or even consider it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.136.148.14 (talk) 10:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.
edit |
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 39 | 24 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| 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. R Delivery Bot 01:43, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 03, 2007
edit |
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 40 | 1 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
I'm gonna kick your butt! [beats Alphachimp to a pulp] -User:Flatts 04:58, 3 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncle Dee (talk • contribs)
- Alright...alphachimp 04:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Sew Fast Sew Easy article
editGgarvin has at my suggestion put together a proposed article for Sew Fast Sew Easy. You had protected this as a redirect several months ago because Ggarvin and what appear to be his meatpuppets were repeated recreating the article as an advertisement. I think the current proposal - located at User:Ggarvin/sew fast sew easy - is a big improvement over the deleted versions and was hoping you would take a look at it.
If you don't see any major issues with the proposal, what is the next step? Can the redirect be unprotected by one of us, or should we ask for a third (or more?) opinion, or does it need to be listed on deletion review? I would greatly appreciate any guidance you have in this. LyrlTalk C 02:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 42 | 15 October 2007 | 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 09:09, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
AlphachimpBot
editI came across your bot and as one of its tasks it listed: "Addition of Wikiproject templates (e.g. {{Architecture}}) to talk pages". Most WikiProjects use WikiProject, Project or WP somewhere in their name, so I thought it was a good idea to move this template to {{WikiProject Architecture}}, to avoid expansion of misnamed template and so the old location is free for a navbox like for example {{Ancient Egypt topics}}. I asked for bot access to clean up the redirects after this move, but perhaps your bot can do it... Please let me know by leaving a message on my talk page. - Mgm|(talk) 18:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Bay.
editʕ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.189.78 (talk) 05:08, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 43 | 22 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315
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 13:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 44 | 29 October 2007 | 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 05:14, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 45 | 5 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 46 | 12 November 2007 | 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 07:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 47 | 19 November 2007 | 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 (talk) 09:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Warren Throckmorton article added
editAn article on Prof. Warren Throckmorton of Grove City College was added recently. His name was also included among the notables in the Grove City College article.
This is FYI. If you want to add, delete, modify the Throckmorton article to make it more accurate, here's your chance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spirikitik (talk • contribs) 13:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Mohammed Al moudi
editHow did you know about Mohammed Al Moudi? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jemahm2000 (talk • contribs) 22:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 48 | 26 November 2007 | 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 (talk) 07:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 49 | 3 December 2007 | 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 08:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Nigel McGuinness
editAlphachimp, I have opened up an ArbCom request regarding Nigel McGuinness and have included you because you have contributed substantially to the debate at hand. It can be found at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Nigel_McGuinness. Reswobslc (talk) 00:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
hi
editwhat's up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.160.60.238 (talk) 22:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Pages with too many ifexist calls
editWhy does this tag keep coming up on every page I visit now? ThundermasterTRUC 15:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 08:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 50 | 10 December 2007 | 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 (talk) 07:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Noob
editYou have no life. LOL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.91.133.194 (talk) 16:52, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 51 | 17 December 2007 | 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 (talk) 18:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
blocked
editI got blocked for vandalism of articles ive never seen before...i use mnay IP's but kostly from my home. at scool, it says that the scool IP is banned. but my acc is banned anyways at home. dfid something go wrong or did i get hacked?
Explodinglam —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.18.54 (talk) 03:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
edit| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | 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 (talk) 12:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC)