User talk:Coren/Archives/2011/June

False positive

This is a false positive, there is not even any text at the link it gave at http://www.nndb.com/people/478/000022412/bibliography. -- Cirt (talk) 06:40, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Can this please be removed from the associated lists the bot added it to? -- Cirt (talk) 06:47, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's a wiki, but it's not really necessary to do so (and might even be better not to): entries there are annotated when they are false positives so it's clear that a human did verify it. — Coren ^(talk) 10:52, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

How are they annotated when they are false positives? -- Cirt (talk) 12:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Using {{subst:SCV|false}}, though as with so many other things, it's probably preferable that the original submitter simply makes a normal note under the list entry and an independent reviewer cross-checks it. MLauba ^(Talk) 13:05, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Where to make such a note? -- Cirt (talk) 13:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

On the SCV listing where CSB adds the entry, though the edit summary when the CSB notice is removed usually works too.

That being said, Coren, I can't for the life of me figure what the bot picked on this one :) MLauba ^(Talk) 13:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Link to the page of the SCV listing you are referring to, please? -- Cirt (talk) 13:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:SCV, under the date of tagging. — Coren ^(talk) 13:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Nothing sane. There's still this lingering bug when a search result returns an empty page when the extract seemed to match. — Coren ^(talk) 13:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for the helpful responses and feedback! ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 13:18, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold

Hello,

I am a representative from Sony Pictures Classics and it is my job to add our films to Wiki. Are we not allowed to use content from our homepage on Wiki? Why was our listing deleted? Please advise ASAP.

Thanks,

Jamie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tr1ckjamie (talk • contribs) 13:27, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) As we do not verify user identities upon account creation, we have to rely on a verification process to ensure that material published elsewhere has been legitimately made available for Wikipedia's use. The verification process is described here. Also note that in this specific case, an article already existed on the movie in question.

Last but not least, before contributing further, it is recommended that you familiarize yourself with our guidelines for editing with a conflict of interests. Regards, MLauba ^(Talk) 13:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Volunteer Culture?

Hi there. I'm pursuing a story for WNYC about Wikipedia's culture of volunteerism, and would like to know if you could informally answer a few questions for me. Please email me at jordanbowenATgmail.com if you have a few minutes. Thank you! JordanBowen (talk) 15:14, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I Changed North Valley Parkway (Gavilan Peak) to North Valley (Gavilan Peak) Parkway

I have moved the information from North Valley Parkway (Gavilan Peak) to North Valley (Gavilan Peak) Parkway, I feel this name is better fitting to be on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwertyx2 (talk • contribs) 02:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I Phoenix Anonymous, the creater of the page North Valley Parkway (Gavilan Peak) do approve of the conversion by my friend (Qwertyx2) to North Valley (Gavilan Peak) Parkway, I had requested him to do so, but am appauled by how sloppily he has done so. Phoenix (talk) 02:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)(talk) 19:33, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

Gude Cause text copyright

The text was supplied by the Committee who organised the Gude Cause Procession and which first appeared in www.gudecause.org.uk (this is no longer online). Therefore since we already own the copyright we wish it to appear on the Gude Cause page on Wikipedia. Please let me know how to proceed. Suffragist 10:03, 5 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suffragist (talk • contribs)

Gude Cause text copyright

The text was supplied by the Committee who organised the Gude Cause Procession and which first appeared in www.gudecause.org.uk (this is no longer online). Therefore since we already own the copyright we wish it to appear on the Gude Cause page on Wikipedia. Please let me know how to proceed. Suffragist 10:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suffragist (talk • contribs)

Question raised on Proposed Decision page

You asked, "why were they expressed to the Foundation which Racepacket (erroneously) believed employed her?" I respectfully submit that the answer is that at that point there were two issues 1) LH was making false statements in a wide variety of fora that "Racepacket accused me of plagiarism" and 2) LH claimed that her "supervisor" was misstating, and advising her to misapply, Wikipedia's policy on close paraphrasing. When I contacted the admin who was editing the Netball article at the time, Hawkeye7, he indicated concern that he "can only anticipate a scathing indictment of the Wikipedia, its editors and its policies." in LH's report. So, it seemed logical to invoke WMF's open door policy to raise the situation. A careful reading of the full meta thread will show that I was not seeking punitive reprisals for some content dispute and that LH agreed that WMF was not "her employer." I have also stated that I did not know how widely read the meta list was and that if I have problems with a WMF employee in the future, I now know how to send an email to just the appropriate person. I have also said that my willingness to contact the WMF in this case does not mean that I believe it is appropriate to contact an non-WMF-employee's employer to resolve on-wiki disputes. At the time, I knew LH's home university, but did not contact it. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Thank you for all that you do for Wikipedia. Racepacket (talk) 18:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, strictly speaking, the question was rhetorical. That is, it raised the issue that you seemed to have a problem with LH's participation in the article rather than any generic problems with the article (because contacting the Foundation would have made no sense if your concerns weren't with that specific editor). — Coren ^(talk) 18:57, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Making WP:Mediation meaningful

Please consider how you might assist Feezo, who is the mediator at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Senkaku Islands.

As context, please scan familiar words at "Hands off" mediation plan.

Mediation involves conflated issues, but wider community intervention is needed in order to help, support and encourage Feezo so that we may reach those issues. --Tenmei (talk) 18:25, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Null votes for WMFB election.

Re [1].

Thanks for the message. I realize that my vote ends up not counting, in the same way as when I choose to spoil a ballot paper for government elections in South Africa: they aren't counted for the final percentages even tho they're shown in results - only unspoilt votes are counted in the totals used to calculate the percentages.

It's not that I think every candidate is equally suitable or unsuitable (you're currently the best ranked (47), way ahead of last place mvart4u (94)), but I'm an extremist when it comes to certain issues and if a candidate/party crosses certain lines, I simply will not vote for them - even in a tactical way. This would hold even in a perfect storm situation like in the movie Swing Vote: given the choice between Bush, Gore, and Nader in Florida in 2000, knowing that if I voted for Nader that Bush would win (due to the electoral college), and that if I voted for Gore that Gore would win - I'd still vote for Nader even tho my ranking was:

• 20 Nader (favorite)
• 65 Gore (crossed several lines)
• 80 Bush (really bad)

It's impractical, but that's the way my brain is wired.

I would not be upset if you or mindspillage were elected to the board. Despite the way I usually end up voting, I'm actually a big fan of granular Condorcet systems. -- Jeandré, 2011-06-09t12:35z

Fair enough. I'm rather the activist about everyone having a voice, and I feared that yours might not have been heard by accident rather than design.

That said, I'd really want to hear what you found objectionable about my position on environmentalism if you feel like discussing it (either now or after the election if that feels fairer to you). My response is all about avoiding the superficially easy solutions that are more "feel good" than lasting, and that would have seemed to me to be in line with what seems to be your position? Or maybe I've misunderstood. — Coren ^(talk) 13:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

My position is extreme: I'm a car-free vegan who won't become a biological parent because of human overpopulation, and who tries to only use products that weren't imported; so I'm unlikely to vote for any candidates considered normal.

I think there are very few defensible reasons to fly (tho I'm guilty of doing it myself in the past), so I really dislike the Wikimanias, and quit the local WM chapter when they continued to bid for a Wikimania.

While I think carbon trading generally is nonsense and has the same problems as Catholic indulgences; buying renewable generation credits for electricity used is a good thing when one can't yet directly use renewably generated energy. I haven't yet been convinced that these kind of credits are just greenwashing feel-good tokens, taking focus away from more important actions. -- Jeandré, 2011-06-09t14:39z

Ah, then I fear you're further along that continuum than where I can reach. I agree with the concept of personal responsibility and the importance of really integrating environmental concerns in what we do and how we think, and we almost certainly share the same disdain for greenwashing and lip service, but I'm in the "we can have our cake and eat it too, provided we learn to stop wasting it" camp.  :-) — Coren ^(talk) 14:52, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Untitled

Hey Marc, can you tell me what happened to Sophie? Was it an adult pretending to be a kid here? DukeNukemNuk2 (talk) 16:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

For what should be obvious reasons, we don't discuss cases like this publicly. Sorry. — Coren ^(talk) 17:01, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Seeking input on a proposed finding of fact

Hello. I am writing this message as a third party monitoring an ongoing arbitration case. I have been voicing concerns about a proposed finding of fact since 6 June, but no arbitrator has chosen to respond to those concerns. If you have a moment, I would appreciate your input on Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Racepacket/Proposed_decision#Proposed_finding_9. I apologize for contacting you on your personal talk page, but despite posting notes daily on the proposed decision talk page requesting arbitrator input, no one has responded. Thank you. —Bill Price (nyb) 22:11, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Bot problem

On my user talk page, your bot has identified a redirect page British Rubber Producers Research Association as having the same content as the page it redirects to Tun Abdul Razak Research Centre. This doesn't seem to be right? Jim Killock (talk) 23:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Atlin_Gold_Rush

Could you convert the Altin Gold Rush article to the Atlin article? Neptunekh2 (talk) 03:44, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Stepping away from Wikipedia

I will step away from Wikipedia, I promise. But please grant the simple requests I have made. We were very nearly at that stage last week, when an acceptable promise was made. But I do not know whether the member of the committee who made that pledge was authorised to. This is part of the problem of communicating with the committee. Emails with promises are sent, I reply, no reply back, confusing and conflicting messages from other members, various bits of abuse from both sides. Blocking is not the answer. A reasonable conversation between adults is the answer. If only we can have that conversation. 109.148.208.182 (talk) 20:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

If you are referring to removing the tags from your user page, then that can be arranged if and only if you disengage from Wikipedia and refrain from editing any further until the conditions we have already referred to have been met. I don't believe any other request is likely to be entertained at this time. — Coren ^(talk) 00:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I had already agreed to this compromise (this was to remove all the offensive and demeaning tags from various pages, not just this). Most of this long problem could have avoided simply by Arbcom answering emails. If this could actually be done, then you have my absolute word that I will not damage Wikipedia by writing articles. 109.148.159.193 (talk) 06:18, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

That's not the deal: Iridescent said you should not edit, as has Coren above. If you want to be treated as vanished (as you suggested) you must actually quit editing Wikipedia. If you return to edit (as you are now), the tags have a reasonable basis for remaining. I know you say you accepted the deal weeks ago, but that was days before you rescinded your request. This could have been avoided if you give us enough time to come to quorum on the issue.

Because you are clearly editing, I don't think your assurances for weeks ago seem sufficient. Please state plainly and publicly that you will not edit Wikipedia again. If you do that, I'll remove the damn things myself and deal with the committee end. Cool Hand Luke 04:02, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Peter: Please see Elen's email for the Committee's offer. For clarity: the one and only offer on the table is to remove all of those tags if and only if you agree to quit editing entirely. Cool Hand Luke 16:54, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Note

You've got mail. -- Cirt (talk) 15:20, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I would appreciate a response, thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 15:24, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Gotten, and responded to. — Coren ^(talk) 15:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Peugeot Type 184

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Peugeot Type 184, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.classic2.dds.nl/Peugeot91.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:23, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

The robot is wrong. The text is my own. It paraphrases the text of the German wikipedia entry on the same car and (more loosely) elements of the Italian wikipedia entry on the car. Charles01 (talk) 15:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

rfar recuse

Hi Coren, I'm guessing that you'll be recusing on the rfar re political activism. Could you add a note to that effect for counting purposes. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:16, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, yes, obviously. Sure thing. — Coren ^(talk) 02:31, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Unusual false alarm over public domain material

After the first few copyright vio tags I received because I quoted the text of military decoration citations garnered from www.theaerodrome.com, I quit doing that. I now find the originals as printed in The London Gazette or Flight. I clean up the typos and change the line breaks. I thought this would throw your bot off track.

That seems to have worked until I posted my latest article, Arthur Randall. Your bot now insists that the quoted military decoration citation I harvested from The London Gazette has been copyrighted by www.theaerodrome.com. Is there no end to this madness?

Georgejdorner (talk) 05:31, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Vincelord

About the page i created for I Am the Law, I did get some of the info from the IMDB but i also got much of the info from a book about movies, so i'm not sure what i should do to keep the page from being deleted.Vincelord (talk) 15:40, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Your bot is broken, please fix it!

Hi, Coren. Your bot "CorenSearchBot" tags pages with which nothing is wrong entirely, like for example Abilene and Southern Railway. The only thing related to the article on the web page your bot believes the article was copied from is that the name of the railroad was mentioned in one paragraph. You won't find a single piece of wording copied from that page. So why does your bot claim otherwise? That's plain and simply annoying. Just imagine that happens to an unexperienced user! They will simply vanish if they add an article and suddenly face accusations of copyright violation and find their article tagged with an ugly box telling the text might be stolen. As this bug does harm the project I suggest you take the bot off until that is fixed. Thank you for your cooperation. --Thogo (Talk) 00:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

re: the Political activism request.

Dear Coren, I've added links to the AfD discussions under the "dispute resolution" section. If I am in error in placing them there, please feel free to remove. Apologies if I have over-stepped my bounds. Cheers, — Ched :  ?  02:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, they're not strictly dispute resolution but I think they serve well to illustrate how hopelessly divisive the issue is. I think it was a good idea to include them. — Coren ^(talk) 02:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Your Bot seems to have itself muddled up.

Hi there.

Your bot - CorenSearchBot, tagged a new article of mine I just created, Fung Kai Hong (a Hong Kong International footballer) with a Copyright tag, claiming I've directly copied information from This article. There are a few problems with this, Firstly, the article it's claiming I copied the information from is about Xu Deshuai a completely different football player. Secondly, the words that it seems to have tagged are common words - i.e. Hong Kong, Citizen AA (Football Club) etc. Thirdly, I did not use that website at all during my research on Fung Kai Hong, I've included certified sources in the reference list, and External links.

This may just be a simple error made by your bot, However I don't believe I've breached any copyright laws anywhere. Since you created the bot to pick up on these sorts of things, can you please have a quick look, and make sure I haven't done the wrong thing here. It may seem like I'm overreacting here slightly, I'm just a tad worried I may have done something wrong. If so, let me know and i'll be more then happy to fix any mistakes made.

Thanks, Nath1991 (talk) 14:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry, you haven't done anything wrong. The possibility that two articles can end up looking a lot like each other because of the subject rather than because of copying is the reason why human beings review every tagging: no automated process can guess why two articles look a lot like each other, just note that they do and wait for a human to figure out why. — Coren ^(talk) 14:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Sanity check

Hi Coren. I need a quick (and informal) sanity check on an action of mine, and you were the first sane person that I saw on my watchlist. Would you mind taking a look at this at your first convenience? Thank you, AGK [•] 20:39, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

It's not insane; editors are certainly allowed to maintain a level of decorum they feel comfortable with on their own talk page. — Coren ^(talk) 21:18, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

From Vincelord

A few days ago my page on the movie I Am the Law was tagged as a possiable copyright violation. I'v since rewritten most of the article yet the tag is still on, what can i do to remove the tag.Vincelord (talk) 15:44, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thomas Magladery

CorenSearchBot seems to be very confused. The article Thomas Magladery does not appear to be a substantial copy of the content of the URL http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_all_detail.do?locale=en&ID=1463 although that URL is referenced for a small subset of the article content. I will remove the tag. --Big_iron (talk) 02:05, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I just noticed something about the Duplication Detector report produced as a result of the bot's processing - see here. The report says:

Comparing documents for duplicated text:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Magladery
• http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_all_detail.do?locale=en&ID=1463

The second URL, unlike the correct URL http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_all_detail.do?locale=en&ID=1463, causes a "500 Internal Server Error" at www.ontla.on.ca and the comparison utility appears to be processing that error text instead. Here is the rest of the comparison report:

Downloaded document from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Magladery (25307 characters (UTF8), 343 words)
Downloaded document from http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_all_detail.do?locale=en&ID=1463 (4287 characters, 557 words)
Total match candidates found: 5 (before eliminating redundant matches)

Matched phrases:

legislative assembly of ontario http www ontla on ca web members members all detail do locale en id 1463 retrieved 2011 06 19 mr
members all detail jspservice members all detail java 1029 src members members all detail jsp 178 at com orionserver oracle application server containers for
(4 words, 26 characters)

Matching phrases found: 1

Some of the words above in the "Matched phrases", for example "oracle application server containers", do not appear if the correct URL is used but do appear in the internal server error text. I am not sure how the error with &amp handling is creeping into the dialog between the bot and the utility but you probably have more insight than me. Anyway, I'm sticking with "very confused". --Big_iron (talk) 03:20, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

David Forrest (Australian politician)

CorenSearchBot has tagged David Forrest (Australian politician) as being a possible copyright violation of http://davidrforrest.com, but it is in error:

• I wrote David Forrest (Australian politician) myself, from scratch.
• A quick glance at http://davidrforrest.com shows that it is a completely different person and - to human eyes - there is no similarity between the pages other than "David" and "Forrest".

Perhaps the bot's rules need tweaking. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Bot language needs some tweaking

This bot uses unnecessarily accusatory language. It should be improved.Mtsmallwood (talk) 03:20, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Herbert James Davis

CorenSearchBot seems to have a new problem with certain formats of URL. Just for the record, the URL is http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_all_detail.do?locale=en&ID=1059 which appears to be processed as http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_all_detail.do?locale=en&ID=1059. There are definitely other articles in Wikipedia of a similar format associated with similarly structured URLs. Actually, the fact that the bot seems to identify a text match between the internal server error text and the Wikipedia article text is also disturbing. Anyway, it appears that something has changed very recently to bring on this issue. --Big_iron (talk) 11:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, hey, that's a great lead. I'll investigate ASAP. Thanks. — Coren ^(talk) 14:17, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that Pediocactus knowltonii seems to have encountered the same issue - see here. --Big_iron (talk) 11:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Cutch (steamship)

Your bot accuses me of a copyright violation between my latest article Cutch (steamship) and http://www.cimorelli.com/cgi-bin/magellanscripts/ship_dates_volume.asp?ShipName=Cutch+(steamer) (Duplication Detector report). This is the second time this has happened and to be honest, it is getting tiresome. What seems to have occurred is that www.cimorelli.com has taken a large amount of primary sources, reshuffled them a bit and converted them into a database, and uploaded them with little or no wording change. In particular this seems to have been done with the McCurdy Marine History, a standard reference work on Pacific Northwest Steamboats. Now, I actually OWN a physical copy of the McCurdy Marine history which I specifically consulted when writing Cutch (steamship), and I have no need to copy material from www.cimorelli.com, nor have I done so. Of course, when writing about things like details of ship construction, etc., there will be some overlap and similarity. It is becoming irritating to write an article from scratch with careful attention to detail and then as the first comment have some bot accuse me of plagiarism.Mtsmallwood (talk) 16:46, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: On a related note...

There are many transliterations/latinizations (a pain with some names): Bronislav, Branislav, Branislaus, Bronislavus, Bronislaus, Bronislau, Bronissius, probably more than I an missing. Some of them may be correct, for non-Polish names, but forcibly translating/transliterating them creates a major mess, as it obscures the national origin (that for those familiar with Slavic names makes it clear in some cases the nationality or ethnicity of a given person). See also Bronisław and Branislav (name). PS. The story of þ is interesting, but missing from that article, perhaps you could add it there? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:52, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd need to find a good source for it, I couldn't tell you the name of the book I read that in (it was about the history of the printing press). I will look it up though, see if I can ferret it out. — Coren ^(talk) 22:17, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Eisenstein Elizabeth L. 1979. The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communications and Cultural Transformations in Early-Modern Europe, Cambridge University Press,  ? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:20, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Hah, actually, you didn't look in the right section: this section mentions the bit about the fonts.  :-) — Coren ^(talk) 22:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I stand corrected :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:34, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

The discussion has now been going on long enough that we are beginning to go around in circles. Before talk escalates to shouting, I think it is important to attempt a policy wording that would have the broadest appeal among the 'neutrals' that will also hopefully swing some of the opposers. Vejvančický (talk · contribs) and I have been trying to work out on my talk page what wording we would like to see in a new proposed statement. Your input would be appreciated. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

kilo kapanel

all the info im adding here is not copy wrote i actually wrote my own bio. i just have the same bio wrote about on different sites — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kapanelli (talk • contribs) 21:50, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Bot down

Just a heads up, I believe the SearchBot is down; no edits in over 12 hours.--NortyNort (Holla) 09:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

That's... odd. As far as I can tell, nothing went wrong — the bot is still running and simply picked up where it left off. Perhaps the flakiness that the Wikimedia sites had a while back is to blame? — Coren ^(talk) 00:57, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Could be, I have been getting a lot of "edit-only" messages in the past few days and last week the whole server was down for an hour or so. Thanks for looking into it.--NortyNort (Holla) 01:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

RfC/U: Cirt

Dear Coren, further to the recent Political activism request for arbitration and various arbitrators' comments at that request to the effect that there had not been to date an RfC/U on Cirt, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Cirt. Best, --JN466 13:20, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:AC#Who_is_responsible.3F

Thank you for keeping us admins up to date. Apologies accepted. Bearian (talk) 17:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

The only word that comes to mind is regrettable. It's a sad truism that no system to which outside access is granted (as any collaborative project must be) can ever be completely secure. We try our best, but — pardon the bluntness — shit happens. What we do then is pick ourselves up, and endeavor to do better. — Coren ^(talk) 00:53, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Paranoid - moi?

"That's just his paranoia speaking; he probably believes that." "the lies seal his doom" You seem to have been determined to attack me at all costs for daring to point out the obvious. So keen were you to attack me, you could not even read and digest the evidence presented to you. How smug and deternined you sounded. Any other editor who defamed another as much as you have defamed me would be sent packing for good. I wonder what other defamatories you whisper about others who you take against on your not so secret list. Well I'm not looking quite so paranoid now am I, more like a prophet. Meanwhile, you are left looking really rather nasty and ignorant. I can't wait to see what is coming out next Giacomo (talk) 15:27, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

i didn't mean to plagiarize

i was only using the article as a template. i just wanted to save the framework of the article so i wouldn't loose it if my pc crashed. i apologize. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agent204.15 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

There's no need to apologize. It's a problem, but one that is easily fixed and avoided; now that you know about it, you'll probably not run afoul of it. — Coren ^(talk) 19:33, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Keechaka Vadham

I used that content only as a source of information that too for the plot and nothing else. I did not directly copy-paste the whole content. I have made a few changes to make it look little bit different from the source. Hence I'm removing the tag. --Commander _{(Ping Me)} 17:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC)