User talk:Hersfold/Archive 20 (August 2008)

← Previous archive - Archive 20 (August 2008) - Next archive →

This page contains discussions dated during the month of August 2008 from User talk:Hersfold. Please direct all current discussions there. Thank you.

---

August 1 - 10

Meetup

Wikipedia:Meetup/Tampa -- You're invited! Hires an editor (talk) 14:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but unfortunately I don't live in Florida. Hope things go well! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

moar template help

I was wondering if you could take a look at User:Xenocidic/sandbox2 and tell me if there's any way to not print all those newlines when the if statement returns false, making the final row really huge? –xeno (talk) 15:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. I added in a bunch of <!-- Comments --> to take them out. As far as Mediawiki is concerned, they're now all on one line. Because of that, you may need to add in some <br> tags to make it display properly when those statements are true, but hopefully not. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Hrm, didn't quite work... It calls another template User:Xenocidic/sandbox which is the code for the row... Might not be able to do what I'm trying to do. –xeno (talk) 16:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I think I've gotten it fixed - I moved the |} to the next line, and it seems to have worked. See my test. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

still doesn't seem to work when you have more than 1 lang added ... frustrating me =) –xeno (talk) 21:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• don't beat yourself up over it =) good luck though! –xeno (talk) 03:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• I'm not, really - since I'm studying Computer Science, debugging like this is likely to be what I'm doing the rest of my life. It's good practice. Care for some hat, by the way? I didn't finish it, hats don't taste too good. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• heh, no, you enjoy the hat =) and feel free to tool around in my sandboxes for as long as you please. i don't need them for a while. if you get it sorted, we'll move it into the templatespace so that your work will be properly attributed =) (oh and there may even be a barnstar involved! ;>) –xeno (talk) 03:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• it's been buggin me for 2 weeks =) welcome to the suck ;> –xeno (talk) 04:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• YAAAAYYYY!!!!! It's finally fixed. I had to next each of the #if:s inside each other to get it to work, so you now have a huge line of 48 curly brackets at the bottom of the code which MUST NOT BE TOUCHED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. If they are touched, you'll probably make it look like a really bad batch of bread pudding. But, I did test it, and it should work now. At last. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:15, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

haha yes! i actually tried that once before, but I guess I miscounted and futzed it up towards the end. sorry, I probably should've suggested that! but , wicked ! =) –xeno (talk) 04:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		You've once again rocked my template world with your diligent assistance in helping me fix the row suppression problem with {{iw-matrix}}, something that has been bugging me for nearly 2 weeks. Awesome work! –xeno (talk) 04:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

As always, glad to be of service. Just in the future... don't get too ambitious with the templates, eh? ;-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

=) Oh, I'm sure i'll have another stumper for you sooner or later ;> –xeno (talk) 04:46, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:

Yeah, I can not tell you how many times ive look at a history page and looked at your contribution and said "What? I didnt do that!" Just Like at xenocedic talk page.HereFord 16:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Persistent vandals

In my thinking banned user which has created 12 new accounts from 16:56 today is persistent vandal ?--Rjecina (talk) 23:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Possibly, but first and foremost, they're a sockpuppeteer. Since most site-bans relate to sockpuppetry, we need to gather all evidence of multiple account abuse on a single page. The directions at WP:SSP have you create a subpage, which then can contain evidence from multiple cases. At WP:AIV, reports are immediately removed once the account is blocked, and become very difficult to find for later review. Hope this helps some. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

1 administrator is telling how I can alert administrators on WP:AIV [1], another is saying different .... I have choosen WP:AIV because it is faster. There has not been administrator answers onlast WP:ANI alert so I have needed to contact administrator which is knowing situation--Rjecina (talk) 23:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The correct venue for sockpuppetry is WP:SSP. Woody was giving you a general list of the sites where reports can be made, but from what I can tell, he wasn't specifically directing you towards any of those, and he didn't mention several of our other reporting noticeboards. WP:AIV is generally for severe and persistent vandalism that doesn't seem related to anything else, and WP:ANI is for severe and exceptional cases that often require discussion amongst several administrators and other users. If an ANI report doesn't go answered for a while, make a new comment in the same section and someone should notice it shortly. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

This is not for WP:SSP because situation is clear (his first today puppets are even checked by checkuser but he will kill me and puppet master if he need to check all his puppets). I will put this on WP:ANI. Thanks and bye--Rjecina (talk) 23:24, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Suit yourself. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

My Thanks!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your assistance in helping me. I appreciate a fast administrator, therefor, I award you this barnstar! :-D, thank you once again Hersfold! --eric (mailbox) 23:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Please be prepared to discuss with that IP editor, though - if he shows an intent to talk things over before making further edits, he will be unblocked. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

2008 Southern US Heat wave

Can you place that in WikiNews? *(joke)Where I'm at, it is so hot that Hell has opened up a consulate in the US.(end joke)* 65.163.117.135 (talk) 04:17, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not active on that project myself, and so don't really know what to do, however there are a lot of editors there as well who should be able to help you out, to get your work on or at least help you work on it to meet their policies, whatever they may be. Sorry I can't be of more assistance, but this page should help you get started, and this page looks like their equivalent of our help desk. Best of luck! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for making my work on catching vandals easier. I will post an SSP alert next time around. Thanks! Arbiteroftruth (talk) 04:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Involvement

Greetings Hersfold! =) I just wanted to let you know I joined two Wikiprojects, since I couldn't decide between Film and Psychology. You can take a look at my Open Tasks page that I made, so I have a to-do list, lemme know what you think! Thanks a bunch for your help in #wikipedia-en-help, and for letting me know about the gadget tab! =)

Cheers,
Neuro√Logic 05:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Good to see! Best of luck with those, looks like you're off to a good start. Good night! :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Gwobby

why did you delete Gwobby. It is a real game for the Atari 8-bit, which you can actually play. I don't want to be rude, but can you not delete pages that have real content. There is no reason it should be deleted. I don't want you to get annoyed in your reply, just tell me why. Reply on your page please because i don't have a talk page.

Bigmaz (talk) 20:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)Bigmaz

It was complete nonsense. If you can provide sources to prove otherwise, I'll consider restoring it, but please note that the article will need to meet several criteria of notability and all your sources will have to be reliable. For a list of the reasons pages can be deleted without discussion, see WP:CSD.

And you do have a talk page, it's at User talk:Bigmaz. Please sign your posts on talk pages with ~~~~. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Go to www.freewebs.com/gwobby and play the game, it's not the final version, that still needs to be uploaded.

Bigmaz (talk) 20:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)Bigmaz

That's not a reliable source. Please see WP:RS for details. You need multiple third-party, unsolicited, sources to confirm its notability. Hersfold non-admin^(t/a/c) 22:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Unblock-en-l request

Please see User talk:Stoofy t#Unblock-en-l request and advise. –xeno (talk) 15:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

• By the way, your user page would fit perfectly on 1024x768 , except for the ribbon numerals : 4 4 3 2 3 2, the final 2 is off the page in FF3. –xeno (talk) 17:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've taken a look at it, but it's not that huge a deal. I'm probably not going to bother. Anyway, sorry for the delay, I'll take a look at Stoofy when I get a chance. My flight home is at 6 AM tomorrow. Hersfold non-admin^(t/a/c) 22:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I've been emailing back and forth with her, seems totally good faith. The only reason I haven't unblocked is 'cause I don't want to w-w. –xeno (talk) 22:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

As I said, go ahead if you're willing. I've just got a gut feeling that something's not adding up. Hersfold non-admin^(t/a/c) 22:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

While you're here, do me a favor and set me to "offline" please? User:Hersfold/Status. I forgot last night, and it's full protected because I'm paranoid. Hersfold non-admin^(t/a/c) 22:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to defer to your judgment, I'm unfamiliar with the case. Sure, will do. –xeno (talk) 22:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

User:House1090 case

I am User:House1090...I am not 9 or 10 and I do not want to make any more sock's thats why I asked User:CambridgeBayWeather and now you to give me another chance is in that a sign of maturity, please give me one more chance (you commented about me on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#User:House1090 yesterday), User:House1090 —71.110.203.151 (talk) 15:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

It's being handled on ANI. I'm not going to take any action on this myself unless the discussion comes to a consensus to unblock you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:07, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#User:House1090 I am not going to be unblocked? I realy wanted to be unblocked, I ahve appolagize thousands of times I will do any thing please can I be unblocked, becase you wrote stay block on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#User:House1090, please I just want to be unblock I wish I would have never done what I did, I'm realy truly sorry User:House1090 71.110.203.151 (talk) 23:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you should be unblocked, no, and your continuing block evasion and canvassing is not improving matters. However, the decision is not mine alone, as I've already said. It's being discussed on ANI - if the discussion comes to a consensus that you should be unblocked, you will be. If not, you won't. You can help matters by demonstrating to us that you are able to follow policy in a responsible manner. I'm not swayed by "I'll do anything" pleas, because quite frankly, I don't care if you'll dance a jig; that's not showing us you have the maturity and responsibility we're looking for in your case. Please read through everything we've said in that discussion, the policies that relate to your blocking, and consider your behavior in relation to those. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

But I cant prove none of that unless you give me one more chance I want all of that sockpuppet to be behind me I want to start new, I want to prove to you please tell me how, I realy want to be back, please, User:House1090 71.110.203.151 (talk) 23:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I just told you. Read through our policies, stop canvassing me to be unblocked (because I'm not going to do it), and wait for the discussion to end. If you stop evading your block, you may convince a few. If not, though, I'd recommend coming back in a few weeks or so. It's not the end of the world. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Motto of The Day Ad

Another ad exists previous to yours. Could you please delete Image:Qxz-ad153.gif, per redundancy? Thanks. miranda 00:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh. Sorry, didn't notice one existed. Sure, I'll go take care of it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. miranda 21:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Unblock

I unblocked User talk:Smart.Bid.Auctions without looking carefully enough that you were addressing the user. Please review, and feel free to re-block if you see fit. Tan ǀ 39 01:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I noticed already, it's no big deal. I think he's making a new account, so it'll save the 'crats some work and make him happier at the same time. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Please stop uploading images with "non-commercial" or "Wikipedia only" licenses.

Why would they give those as options if they were not meant to be used? Cambios (talk) 02:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't know why they're on there, because they automatically generate Template:Non-commercial from license selector along with {{db-i3}}. I think it's intended to get people to notice they actually can't do that, because if they really wanted to upload it that way they just wouldn't select a license and it'd be harder for us to notice. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Strange. Well, I don't want to do things wrong, so perhaps you can advise me. I own the copyright to the picture, so that part is a non-issue. I want it to be usable on Wikipedia, and any site that links to wikipedia is fine as well. But I do not want the picture to be modified for any sort of negative purpose. I took the picture with Michael Hartman's permission, but he would not appreciate it if the picture ended up being used somewhere for a defamatory purpose (photoshopped or something of that nature). Cambios (talk) 02:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Since it has to be under a free license, people will be allowed to modify the image. However, you can restrict what they can do with the image when they do modify it. This tag: {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} will place the image under the Creative Commons Sharealike-Attribution license, which requires that any usage be attributed to you and any derivative work be under the same license, and the GFDL, the same license Wikipedia uses for articles. That's probably the best thing for you to use. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Your recent speedy tags

Hey there, Excirial. A user at the Editor assistance board pointed out a couple of your recent speedy deletion taggings, and I just wanted to drop you a line about a couple of them. Please make sure that the article you're tagging actually meets a speedy criteria - while many things may not express notability, such as Rapid roll, only those articles about people, groups, corporations, and web content. Even if it does fit one of those, please try to make sure you use the correct template; for example, {{db-bio}} only applies to biographical articles. If it doesn't seem like any of those criteria apply, it's probably better to PROD the article or send it to AfD. I took a look at some of your other recent taggings, and the ones pointed out seemed to be the exception rather than the rule, but all the same, please try to be a little more careful, especially when using Twinkle. Thanks for all your help; don't think I'm yelling at you, I just wanted to let you know someone had expressed a concern. Happy editing, and keep up the good work! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Lets see, i kind of tagged a lot of articles today, so i am fairly certain there are some questionable material among them. I am not sure (yet) if i still fully remember the reason for tagging them, but ill see if i can remember the original reasoning. :)

• Rapid roll: This one seems to have been tagged with a A7 tag ,although i have no idea why i used that one( And especially a bio? It should at least have been the generic A7.). The article itself was tagged for CSD by a fairly uncommon rationale i use at times. Normally i refer to these as Snowy articles. If i am COMPLETELY certain that the article stands no chance whatsoever on AFD or PROD, and requires a full rewrite before being a good article, i tend to use CSD over the prod/AFD tags. AFD because its a lot of work and takes to long, and PROD because a contest would create an useless AFD. Be assured i don't do this often.
• Tiger images: This is an article i remember quite well, and the tag is indeed an error on my part. Initially i thought it to be redundant with Tiger and wanted to tag it for merger, before spotting at was some form of origional research and issues with advertising promoting a local project. By that time i read trough it twice i ended up being a bit lost on what to do with it. The G6 tag was a bit of a weird decision though, apologies!
• The Gadfly (Philosophy Magazine) and Lutherwood Camp and Retreat Center: I think i pushed the first one of the two under products products and services and the latter under company. Still, its a bit of a weird decision in retrospect, as both don't really apply.

Thanks for notifying me about this. I always like to know if i'm making mistakes (Feedback keeps me on the tips of my toes :P). Also, major thanks for taking this into context; I have had people wandering in with 3-4 mistakes before who then started an entire preach about 4 problems in ONE DAY were intolerable, most times is less then fiendly wording. (Without actually seeing that it was technically just 4 out of 400). Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 23:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Happy to admit to it being me that took it to editor assitance. This wasn't out of a desire to delibrately bad mouth you in a wider setting or any other nasty reason. Rather as I hope I make clear on the editor assistance page it was because I wanted to make sure my concerns were valid before raising them with you given your much greater experience. I hope this is understandable and there's no hard feeling. Dpmuk (talk) 23:33, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

But of course this is understandable! And no, no hard feelings whatsoever :). Everyone makes mistakes, and i am in no way an exception to this. Actually, i like it when these mistakes are pointed out, so i can actually learn from them. There are still articles i tag with the wrong tag, sometimes intentional, sometimes by mistake, or sometimes by misinterpretation. However without feedback, there is little i can change about such things. When starting on WP:NPP i was quite overzealous, and it took quite some time (+some good article removals/speedy declines) before someone ever gave me a nudge. So in short, all feedback is welcome, as long as its Civil, adduming good faith, and not entirely taken out of context :) Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 23:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, that's what I thought. And you're welcome. Just one thing - if you want to leave me a message on my talk page, just leave one and not your whole talk page, k? ;-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

That was indeed a complete failure. I was editing just the section in question till i got a "Your page has been edited already". Once i finished the second reply to Dpmuk i completely forgot this and simply pressed CTRL+a, which in turn selected the entire page and not the section. To bad i couldn't cover up before you saw it, but you cannot say im not generous with text! :P Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 00:07, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Motto of the Day

Hi Hersfold

I saw your note about MOTDs. I've never seen MOTDs, or perhaps I have seen them without knowing what they were. I have a few questions.

I looked at the 2008 mottos. Some are very obscure to me. (That is not a complaint, just a statement.) Are the links in the mottos meant to help in understanding the mottos?

A lot of the mottos are not original. (Again, that is not a complaint, just a statement.) Has any thought been given to including the credit for a motto, in cases when it is known.)

Where could I read some of the mottos from the previous year?

Thanks. (I'll watch for answers here.) Wanderer57 (talk) 05:39, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Many of the mottos don't seem to immediately relate to Wikipedia, no, but they're supposed to be analogies of what Wikipedia is about, assisted by the links. For example, January 4's motto is a direct quote from Ronald Reagan, ans so would look silly if we re-worded it, so the links help explain what we're talking about. "You can learn a lot about a fellow's Wikipedian's character by how he eats edits his jelly beans articles."
2. Yes, whenever we use a direct quote or song lyric, you'll generally see a small, linked arrow (→) next to the start of the motto. In the previous example, this arrow linked to Ronald Reagan. Sometimes this isn't really possible, such as when we rip off Mastercard commercials, or it's just a common phrase that can't really be attributed, and sometimes it's just rather obvious where it's from, and so we don't bother.
3. You can find more at the 2006 and 2007 archives.

I hope that answers your questions, although let me know if you're still curious about anything! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Do the nominations have to be a play on a popular saying or quotation? Just wondering if ideas like "peer review - just point and crit" or "if you can't cite it, don't say it" (both lame, I know) would be useful. Many thanks, Gazimoff 19:16, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

No, your suggestions are fine. Probably some of the better ones are completely original ideas. Quotes get used often just because they're easier to find and people recognize them more; but there's no rule that anything has to be a quote. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

"Terrorist" Categories

I see you closed this AfD with "keep all" despite (by my count) the vote going 16 - 11 in favour of deletion, which is the 60% Wiki defines as "consensus". I'm not at all convinced by your arguments so I have two questions:

• (1) How is it decided when to close these AfDs and how is it decided who will close them?
• (2) Where do I go to request a review of your decision?

Sarah777 (talk) 00:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't close nominations by counting votes. Technically, they're not even considered votes, and I've never seen anything specify a percentage for what merits "consensus", especially since it tends to vary depending on the discussion. When I reviewed the discussion, I actually had a rather hard time deciding how to close it, (so you could consider this a "no consensus" close, which defaults to "keep" anyway), but eventually decided that most of the arguments to delete were fairly well countered by those to keep, and several of the "delete" not-votes were simply "Delete per nom".

As for your questions, all deletion debates are closed after about five days' worth of discussion, except for at Templates for Deletion, where they go for a week. As for who closes them, any administrator can do so, and some clear-cut discussions are occasionally closed by veteran editors. Nothing and no-one decides who closes any given discussion; the only requirement is that they must not have been previously involved in the discussion.

If you'd really like to request a review, you are welcome to go to deletion review and start a discussion there. Before doing so, I'd suggest taking a look at what consensus really is, however, as consensus is not based on numbers alone. If you do decide to start a DRV, please let me know when you do so. And also, if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

OK - I've requested a review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 August 8 - it is a category rather than a template, so I hope I got the process right. Regards Sarah777 (talk) 02:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I've fixed the format, but you need to be a lot more detailed about why you want the review. Why you thought the closure was wrong, etc. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

ze lessons

just FYI, I've finally gotten around to importing the lessons from steve crossin, and I did a thorough read through the whole textbook (again, great work), and made a few minor changes, updating some things, fleshing out some things. feel free to update the originals if desired. –xeno (talk) 01:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll probably work on them later on. Sorry, a lot of that was written specifically for my first adoptee and I've not been good about copy-editing it since, due to the fact all the rest of my adoptees pretty much vanished. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the vanishing adoptee phenomenon is wide reaching. 7 of my first 8 adoptees have been put on the DL. (My very first adoptee, though, is a jolly good chap who's quite active, as are some of my more recent ones). –xeno (talk) 18:17, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Good, it's not just me. :-) Yeah, my first adoptee was quite excellent, but he ran into problems off-wiki and had to leave the project. Nobody since then has really seemed to care. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:19, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

terrorism sub and subsub categories

I suppose you know that there may still be hundreds of 'terrorism' categories still tagged for deletion. Hmains (talk) 02:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

No, I suppose I don't. What fun. Lemme fire up AWB... Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for light fantastic efforts. Hmains (talk) 02:56, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

You're not exactly welcome. You realize that AWB says there's at least 227 of these bloody things to run through. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

There, I think I got them all. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Gennarous

Hi Hersfold. I saw your reply to Gennarous's unblock request. You mentioned that checkusers have extra data that can tell them if people editing from the same IP are really the same person: ..you may not be aware that the checkuser tool gives a bit more than just your IP address, and so if Thatcher says it's confirmed, it's pretty dang certain it's the same person, computer networks or no. If it's not a military secret, can you tell me how that is done? I was wondering if we were being too hard on Gennarous, arguable though that may be. EdJohnston (talk) 21:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you mind if I email you? It's not a secret, per se, but it would be pushing some WP:BEANS up the old nostrils if a sockpuppeteer happened to notice it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure. EdJohnston (talk) 21:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Block

Hi Hersfold. You declined my unblock. I would truly like to ask if you could try to assume good faith on the part of users (I believe this is a policy). As you see, I am not a troll, and I believe my unblock request was stated very reasonably, and I have several other positive contributions on my account to prove it. Thanks for the consideration. 71.58.94.162 (talk) 02:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm more than willing to assume good faith, but "Are you guys as eager to donate a part of your pay check"? It sounds more than a bit taunting to me. Furthermore, how am I supposed to know who you are when you edit anonymously? There was no indication as to who you were until after I declined your request. And as I said, your impatience wasn't helping matters either. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Blame me more, I actually did the hardblock, granted a notice about how ED is asking for money so it doesn't go offline dropped on a high-view page of the 8th most visited website in the world, did look rather suspicious. MBisanz ^talk 02:54, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Your block decline message overwritten by bogus granted post

As you were the administrator who declined an unblock for Special:Contributions/24.60.233.137, I thought you might take interest in the fact that Nbalivetwothousandandthree overwrote the unblock request and your decline reason with a bogus unblock granted message, basically impersonating an administrator. Of course, without admin rights, the actual unblock did not occur. A fairly minor bit of vandalism in the grand scheme of Wikipedia transgressions, to be sure, but as it obliquely affects your admin actions, I felt you might want to know. -- Michael Devore (talk) 04:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Hm. That is unusual. It looks like he got a fairly stern warning for it, though, so it appears handled. We'll keep an eye on it. Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Ladytron edit - thanks for the info.

You posted a helpful reply for me on the Deletion Review page for a Ladytron article I was asking about (you referred me to the talk pages for the individual users).

First of all, thanks. That was good info. I wonder if you could answer my last question, which is "how can I contact a person who has a username but no user page or talk page?" The user is Vkorobkax. And what would I do if their deletion of content is not accidental or in good faith, but actively trying to omit factual information? Thanks!

68.183.225.245 (talk) 17:09, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome - sorry, I'd meant to contact you directly, but I must have gotten distracted.

Anyway, if a user doesn't have a talk page, you can create it in order to leave them a message. Even though you're not registered, the software will allow you to do that. Fortunately, though, his page does now exist, so you can leave him a new message by clicking here.

As for your concerns, I've taken a look at that user's contributions to Ladytron and I don't really see where they've actually removed any content. In fact, most of their work seems to be cleaning up little things. If you have any concerns, though, you should probably link to the Help:Diff (which you can do by finding the edit in the page history, right-clicking on the link next to the entry that says "diff" and copying the link address) and politely ask them what they were doing. Often enough, it is accidental, and they'll fix it. If it was intentional, however, try discussing things with them, and if that doesn't work, seek dispute resolution to help resolve things. I hope this helps, but please let me know if you have any trouble with it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you ever so much! Really appreciate your help. I've now contacted Vkorobkax via your link and some other potential editors of this info and hopefully it will resolve the matter. Your help and support has been super!!!

Rollback

Thank you very much for the granted rollback rights and kind words. Though I will most likely hardly use it it is good to know that it is available to continue the fight against the pointless vandals that inhabit this wiki. Thanks again. JakeDHS07 20:30, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:35, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Vandal IP user

Hi, regarding user: 82.2.236.210 you said he has not had proper warnings. What does it take to warn him properly? He received a last warning before. It seems that Wikipedia policies are so soft that they are mostly useless in these cases. Please explain. Thanks History2007 (talk) 00:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

We prefer that users receive a level four warning (as definied at WP:UTM) and continue to edit beyond that before we block them, except in cases of severe vandalism. Since blocks are preventative and not for punishment, we try to give users a chance to stop and review policy before blocking them. Administrative actions are intended to be a last resort - so don't get angry at me. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for blocking the vandal. History2007 (talk) 00:34, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you could provide the details of how this was vandalism at either relevant thread on WP:AN, to help us in the future. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 00:39, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree. History2007 asked me on my talk page and on AIV, and both times I asked for specific diffs and why it should be considered vandalism. I got either no answer (on my talk page) or vague answers (on AIV). While I have nothing but respect for History and his intent to further the project, perhaps you would experience less frustration if you were more specific in your requests. It was/is clear that you have WAY more experience with this IP than we do. Tan ǀ 39 00:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

My request was mainly to Hersfold, though perhaps History2007 could also enlighten us. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 00:51, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I thought you were talking to him. I'll post on AN. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Ha, oops, sorry Zzuuzz. I misread that one, for sure. Tan ǀ 39 00:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Well, look at it this way. I politely asked him to explain his edits which were basically removing categories. He said nothing and kept reverting. He has previously called others names and insulted them, and has several warnings on his page. He wasted 2 hours of my time.

Am I frustrated? In the end, what use are warnings if they just keep piling up? Anyway, hopefully he will just find something else to do after 3 days. A user with good intent would have responded to the questions. It is amazing how Wikipedia can eat up time.... You get users with piles of knowledge who have to participate in endless debates... sigh..... History2007 (talk) 01:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

In History's defense, there are places on that talk page where he was comparing other users to Hitler. It didn't seem as though that was a different user, so I considered that in the block. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to read his/her user page. But my real issue is with Wikipedia methods in general. There seems to be drive through justice in many cases, where admin decisions are made in a few seconds, at best. The question that everyne involved should ask is: Did I read the talk page for the page in question? Those who read Talk:Visions of Jesus and Mary would notice that back in October 2007 the same scenario was hapenning and users "EALacey" and "Andrew c" were fighting someone who kept removing Categry Jesus from a large number of pages. (You need to look at the edit history of 500 to see the details.) Said persistent user then made two user names "EAGacey" and "Andrev c" to make fun of them and confuse everyone. On that occasion I managed to get rid of him "with fun". I said that he had a good sense of humor and that made him go away. Now similar edits are happening again. There is no response, just the category Jesus gets deleted and he reverts for ever. My feeling is that this fellow likes to make a fool of others and make them waste their time. Has he succeeded in wasting everyone's time here? Of course. Has he laughed at everyone involved? Of course? Are Wikipedia policies adequate? Of course not. The key part of the equation is that he just has to hit undo, while everyone else has to write a book discussing him. That is the failure of Wikipedia policies. If a user is a positive user he will:

• Create a user page.
• Contribute to a few serious articles
• Explain his edits, instead of just reverting.

Is it so hard to understand that this user does not fit in this category? My question to you guys is: When and how are you going to improve Wikipedia policies? Thank you. History2007 (talk) 03:51, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

History2007, thank you for the explanation. I couldn't disagree more with some of the assumptions being made, but I think it would be wasting everyone's time to discuss this further here. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you are right and wasting time was the intent of that user. That was why I was being brief, not to let it take up time. But in the end, in my opinion, all of this is because there are not enough clever gadgets in Wikipedia. E.g. I did not see your question to me, because the Admin Notice page is so very long and hard to look through. In the end, much of Wikipedia is still based on file management, not database management, despite the underlying database. That is why everyone has to work so hard and type so much: lack of technology. And of course, all this category discussion is because there is no semantic lexicon or ontology to guide the categories. So in principle a 12 year old can decide to add or delete categories, while there is a Princeton-based semantic lexicon that is not being used within Wikiedia..... But let me not get started on that... one day in 2071, there will be a version that will make much of this much redundant.... On that note: Is there Chief software architect for Wikipedia? Who does the top level technical thinking for Wikipedia? I would like to suggest a few things. Thanks History2007 (talk) 09:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow, what a waste of your time. All you had to do was provide an admin with an explanation of why this user should be blocked, as the vandalism (if it was) wasn't obvious. You still haven't done that; instead choosing to complain about abstract issues. It's like listening to a professor wax on and on and on about how the toaster shouldn't have burned the toast, when he/she should have just dealt with the damn thing. Tan ǀ 39 15:07, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Alright, that's enough here. History, if you have a specific suggestion on how to improve policy, you're welcome to post here, at the Policy Village Pump. To be honest, though, I have no idea what you're going on about, as none of it seems to relate to what we started talking about. But please, no more of this here. The issue at hand (I think) was settled, and the conversation is just degrading from here. Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

User talk:82.111.128.3

Hi, I think that fellow 82.2.236.210 who was just blocked just reincarnated as User talk:82.111.128.3 and went after both me and Hugo again, vanndalizing and insulting. Could you block him again, and permanently so? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 13:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

We don't permanently block IP addresses, because they can change between users and there's no reason to block someone who wasn't vandalizing. It looks as though this is being handled on WP:AN - please only post in one place, as multiple postings tend to confuse matters. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, sorry. It seems that user:Face found out who he is. In any case, thank you for your efforts for you are also the victim of this psychopath fellow as much as I am. I will write a paper on technology for dealing with vandalism later and post it on my user page so it can be a reference for suggestions. Cheers History2007 (talk) 19:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD tag

Of course Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Quite welcome. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Your link to the userspace template didn't work. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Unblock

Just wanted to thank you for looking at my unblock request. I still believe that it was handled in the wrong way(me and dreaded) Although I didnt agree with everything you inputed, and still had some questions thank you for your attention —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.96.92 (talk • contribs)

You're welcome... I think. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

IP Range Blocks

Thank you for your assistance in stoping the vandalism and block evasion in the Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nangparbat Case. As soon as you blocked the ranges the user continued on another ip and another ip outside of that range. It appears that the range may need to be larger else it may all be for nothing. Knowledgeum :  Talk  19:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

its better if knowledegum talks about this rather than tyring to hide his bias against pakistan why do you edit pakistani mountains and when i edit indian mountains you remove them is there any non pro indian editors out there who can help its simple dont put un referenced data in its a wiki policy and your violating it and as for Hersfold you must be neutral and end islamophobic feelings for you to see the real picture as i said before stop inserting biased un sourced data on masherbrum and gasherbrum whats so hard about that?

To the IP editor who keeps forgetting to sign his posts: By editing here you are evading your block and only setting yourself up to get blocked again, and possibly for even longer. Stop. I, and several other editors, have reviewed your edits and they are disruptive. You are asked to stop at once.

Knowledgeum: Rangeblocks really are a last resort and we try to keep them as small as possible to reduce the collateral damage to other editors. It looks like those IP addresses are already blocked directly, in any event. If you see any more, post them on User:Hersfold/Vandal_watch#Nangparbat, taking care to keep the IP addresses in order and separated by range as I have them now. Don't bother to tell me directly when you do so, I'll be notified immediately when the page changes. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

August 11 - 20

Thanks for the apology

I appreciate your apology for your response to my unblock request. I also thought you might be interested to find that my block was lifted early because Ufuncecu (I was blocked for being his/her sockpuppet), was apparently arguing just as loudly that he/she was not me (obviously more effectively)[[2]]. Anyway, thanks again for the apology. It did make me feel better in the midst of a very frustrating ordeal.66.26.89.99 (talk) 03:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Sorry again - usually checkuser requests are correct - this is only the second case I can recall where the report was actually invalid. Happy editing, and I hope this doesn't impact your editing any. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks unblocking me

Thank You Hersfold, hey is there any kind of hip hop project in wikipedia? i would like to join it--Josecarlos1991 (talk) 04:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Ta-da. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:40, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

petplan usa pet insurance

Hello!

Could you please send me a copy of the deleted article on petplan usa pet insurance that you deleted. I wish to revise and edit it and to try posting again but avoid it being swiftly deleted this time. Thank you,

Athlon2009 (talk) 13:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, the article's at User:Athlon2009/Petplan. Best of luck with it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. :) I wanted to let you know that I have deleted the userfied article because it was a pastiche of sentences copied without verification of permission from other sources. (For example, the chairman announcement was drawn from this pdf; the final paragraph with only a few words changed copied from this and this. The opening paragraph was a straight chunk of this. (And this is probably more detail than you need, given that I expect this deletion will be uncontroversial, but it is my nature to overexplain. :D)) I've addressed that with the contributor, who evidently has made an effort to create a copyvio free new article. I've also explained to him or her why some of the material in the new article was also problematic. (It wasn't as significant, though, so it could be revised or removed or put in quotes.) Anyway, I wanted to let you know.

And while I'm here, I figure I might as well remind you (or point out to you, in case you hadn't encountered it before) that when we userfy a deleted page, it's best to restore it and move it per Wikipedia:Userfy#Userfication_of_deleted_content. This is to satisfy attribution requirements for GFDL, obviously. :) It doesn't matter much in this case, obviously, because the contributor didn't move it. It's just by way of a "small point you may have forgotten or missed". That's one I wasn't aware of until somebody pointed it out to me. :) Cheers. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah. I didn't even think to check for copyvio, and I should have thought of the GFDL stuff - thanks for the reminder. Ok, then, thanks for keeping an eye on that and cleaning up after my mess. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:53, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello

DougsTech (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks very much...

... for unblocking me! --BelovedFreak 22:43, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure. You didn't look like a vandalism-only account, so I figured it was safe to do. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

mediazone.com

Please send me a copy of the deleted article on mediazone.com inc that you deleted. I wish to revise and edit it and to try posting again but avoid it being swiftly deleted this time. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Henkvanniekerk (talk • contribs)

Sure, it'll be at User:Henkvanniekerk/Mediazone in a few minutes. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

All you need is bob

speedily deleted as recreated following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All you need is bob. Was not TV cartoon. Did not meet WP:WEB. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 00:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Hagger's article redirect titles

If you aren't already doing it, it seems to be standard procedure to salt them. Gives him one fewer thing to use. HalfShadow 03:09, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah. Duh. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, salted it. Thanks for the reminder. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:14, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry too much about it; Nawlinwiki generally salts every title he creates anyway. HalfShadow 03:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

WPAFC header

Hello Hersfold, I'm considering to make a couple of changes to this header, but since I don't understand it I thought I would ask you!

• Firstly, redirects, templates and categories are not articles so the categories Category:Template-Class AFC articles and the like seem to be misnamed. I would suggest Category:Template-class AFC pages.
• Secondly, Category:Template-Class AFC articles is currently a mixture of templates created through the AFC process, e.g. Template:Cleanup-reorganize, and "meta" templates used by the project, e.g. Template:Afc blp. This is not satisfactory. Is it because the notarticle parameter has not been set correctly? Similarly with Category:Category-Class AFC articles.
• Thirdly, is it possible to change the wording of the header depending on whether it is a page actually created through the process or is meta page?

Thanks for your time, MSGJ (talk) 08:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it seems as though the template has been "updated" (without my knowledge) since I last saw the code, so I'm not sure many of the changes you're proposing are even possible without messing with a zillion other Wikiproject templates. It's now using {{WPBannerMeta}}, which is a bit too general for our purposes. However, to address your questions...

1. That does make sense, however it's done that way to get bots and other scripts to read it properly, and it also makes it a lot easier for the template to work (everything is "Category:Foo-Class Project articles", you just stick in variables for Foo and Project and you're done). Also, renaming the category is not like renaming a page; you've got to re-categorize everything in the category into the new one and then delete the old one. It's very tedious and probably not really worth it.
2. Originally, there was a notarticle= parameter that allowed us to categorize templates used by the project into Category:Articles for creation templates. Unfortunately, when they "updated" the banner to use the Wikiproject meta template, that got thrown out and now everything is (inappropriately) lumped in with everything else.
3. Fortunately, they didn't completely get rid of notarticle=, and so setting notarticle=yes will do that. Leaving the parameter out adds "This page was created through the Articles for Creation process, and therefore is within the scope..." Setting it to yes takes that section out.

I'm not really entirely happy with the meta template, now that you've pointed out how it's mis-categorizing everything, so I'll try to see if it won't cause a huge uproar if I revert it to the previous hard-coded version (that was working perfectly fine, thank you very much, you meta-template people you). Using their template makes some of the documentation a bit outdated and incorrect, and really doesn't serve our project well because of everything we do. Unfortunately, we can't fix any of those problems without removing their meta template, so we're sort of stuck until that happens. I'll let you know what comes out. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:03, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I did suspect something like this had happened. It might be better to try to work with this meta-template just so it is more consistent with other projects. I noticed there is a Project-class, into which all the meta stuff could be placed. (Of course it would mean going through and reclassing them ...) MSGJ (talk) 18:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Did you have a chance to think about this any more? (I notice you say you are busy so probably not ...) Something else: I notice we have a category for C-class articles but your header doesn't cope with them. MSGJ (talk) 03:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Ack, no, sorry - I've been in training all week for my position at college and haven't had much chance to get on Wikipedia at all. I'll try to take a look at this later tonight. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:28, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

page protections

About a week ago, you protected a few batman related pages, including Batman (film series), Riddler, and Catwoman. Please reprotect, the IP vandals filling the pages with nonsense came right back to one already, and will no doubt hit the rest soon. thank you. ThuranX (talk) 21:25, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

There's only been one IP edit to Batman (film series) and he reverted himself within minutes. It wasn't even blatant vandalism, from what I can tell. Protection is considered a last resort - if the vandalism does pick up seriously again, then we'll reprotect. Right now there's nowhere near enough activity to justify keeping the articles under lock and key. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

User: Bill1fr block

Just to let you know, I was looking at that user as well after CSDing the article and support the block. Gazimoff 13:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that deletion log and considered not blocking them, since I figured you would have if they'd gotten too annoying, but their other contributions nailed the coffin, as it were. Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 13:39, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

No worries. The mroe eyes we have on something, the better. Besides, I'm still getting the hang of all this block malarkey :) Gazimoff 13:42, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Valerie Wilson

Would it be possible for me to get a copy of the deleted talk page from the Valerie Wilson (lottery winner) article? Thanks. Unschool (talk) 16:46, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, it'll be at User:Unschool/Valerie Wilson talk in just a few minutes. Why do you want the talk page, though? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I just wanted a record of the comments made by an anon editor. While I have no problem with the article being deleted, there is an editor who has been working that page for over a year trying to insert his own POV; his bad faith editing is manifest in the record of that talk page, and I just wanted it in case he later denies what he was trying to do. (Is that bad of me to ask for it for that reason?). Anyway, thanks. Unschool (talk) 06:55, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe it's been generally decided that it's ok to gather up evidence like that if you have an honest belief that there is some abuse going on, just in case it gets extremely troublesome to the point action needs to be taken. Just don't stalk him and you should be ok. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Lafayette Reservoir

I suppose creating an article as a talk page is one way to get around the IP creation restrictions...haha. I admit I was confused for a moment. Certainly clever! Perhaps let the IP know about WP:AFC for future reference? GlassCobra 02:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Replied on IRC. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Help Requested

Many Thanks! I knew there was a template I could add, but for the life of me, I couldn't remember what it was. Take Care and Have a Great Weekend...NeutralHomer • Talk 03:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

PJM Interconnection

It seems like someone has recreated this article, which you previously deleted. You may want to take a look at it. Green caterpillar (talk) 01:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's on my watchlist. Thanks for the heads up. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

The article as it is now is good enough to stay for now - it has been improved significantly and there's no reason to delete it as it currently stands. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

August 21 - 31

Ben Mullany

Hi. In this recent AfD, I included Ben Mullany, an article about one of the victims, remarking only that it also failed WP:BIO1E. The discussion was all about the main article, and ended "no consensus"; the only specific mention of "Ben Mullany" was one "redirect". I still think that Ben Mullany adds nothing - it is full of dramatic but unencyclopedic detail, but is a classic case of "famous for one event". My first thought was to relist it as a separate AfD, but that would probably end with "redirect", and it doesn't need an AfD to achieve that. So I am minded to boldly redirect "Ben Mullany" to "Antigua honeymoon murders", but I haven't been in this situation before, and thought I had best check with you as the closing admin to see if it would be against precedent or etiquette to do it so soon after the AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Since we did just hold the AfD on it, you're probably better off trying to discuss it on the article's talk page first. You're right in that AfD's don't normally have anything to do with redirection, but we do occasionally close one with that result and some may see it as a rather WP:POINTy way to "delete" the article. If you don't get any objections (give it a week or so, so that it has a chance to be noticed), then sure, go ahead. Thank you for not trying to drag this to Deletion Review. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. It hadn't occurred to me to use DRV to challenge a "keep" decision, can one do that? Regardless, I have no quarrel with the decision - while I wasn't really convinced by the arguments of those who wanted to keep, they did have a point, and there certainly wasn't a consensus to delete. I have posted on Ben Mullany's talk page as you suggested. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:54, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Deletion Review is intended to appeal any deletion or closure of a deletion discussion, be that keep, no consensus, delete, or anything else. That said, it is sort of a last resort and you are expected (if not required) to attempt to discuss with the deleting/closing admin before filing a review, and are expected to have strong evidence or arguments as to why the closure was not appropriate. Simply "I don't agree" will get you turned down real fast. Don't know why I'm going on about it so much since you're not doing it (THANK YOU), but just for future reference, I suppose. Let me know how your discussion turns out. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I waited a week, as you suggested. There were two comments on the talk page, both supporting a redirect; one had independently added a "mergeto" tag. Since then, a new editor, Welshrich (talk · contribs), has completely rewritten both Antigua honeymoon murders and Ben Mullany in a much less journalistic and more encyclopedic style; but I think the BIO1E argument still applies, and having read the new versions of both articles carefully I did not think there was anything relevant to be merged from the Ben Mullany article. So I have redirected it, and left a note for Welshrich explaining. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

That sounds good. Be ready to discuss things if Welshrich doesn't agree with it, but everything should sort out ok. Thanks for checking back in. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.

Sorry I haven't been sending this over the past few weeks. Ralbot (talk) 06:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 31	28 July 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimania 2008 wrap-up	WikiWorld: "Terry Gross"
News and notes: Unblocked in China	Dispatches: Find reliable sources online
WikiProject Report: Military history	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 32	9 August 2008	About the Signpost

Anthrax suspect reportedly edit-warred on Wikipedia	WikiWorld: "Fall Out Boy"
Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes, July	WikiProject Report: WikiProject New York State routes
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 33	11 August 2008	About the Signpost

Study: Wikipedia's growth may indicate unlimited potential	Board of Trustees fills Nominating Committee for new members
Greenspun illustration project moves to first phase	WikiWorld: "George Stroumboulopoulos"
News and notes: Wikipedian dies	Dispatches: Reviewing free images
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 34	18 August 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: Help wanted
WikiWorld: "Cashew"	Dispatches: Choosing Today's Featured Article
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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) 06:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks

Many thanks for clearing the IP issue for me. Badagnani (talk) 23:06, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Just remember to discuss things more. ;-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Please

Review my request for rollback.--Master of Pies (talk) 02:31, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

It's already been done. There's no need to call for help; those requests usually get dealt with quickly. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Rollback grant

Your faith in me is much appreciated. Thank you! -Dewelar (talk) 21:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Smithfield, London GA-renomination

Hi I replied to your detailed review and renominated the article for GA --DarTar (talk) 22:30, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt and spot-on 2nd review, appreciated. --DarTar (talk) 17:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Cookie for you!

John Sloan (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Its a real shame that Master of Pies turned out to be a sock, that then turned abusive! I hope this cookie makes your day happier :-) John Sloan (talk) 23:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch - I really need it after a long day! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

your USSF link in your "about me" section

Fyi, it leads to a disambiguation page. Thanks again for the help on my user page.--Rockfang (talk) 23:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Whoops. Thanks, I'll fix that. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Zydrate.com

Hi, I own the website Zydrate.com, and I consent for a page to be made. I was informed that the person that I gave permission to, to make a Zydrate wiki page had it deleted because of copyright infringement. If I need to send you an e-mail from admin@zydrate.com, just let me know. I will be more than happy to give you the consent that is needed. Thank you!

99.163.102.22 (talk) 02:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)Stacey Robinson, Owner and Administrator of Zydrate.com

You can send such permission to permissions-en-l AT lists DOT wikimedia DOT org , however that wasn't the only issue with the article. It also qualified for deletion under CSD G11, which is "blatant advertising". Wikipedia works to maintain a neutral tone in all of its articles, and editors with a marked conflict of interest are asked not to edit articles they are personally affiliated with. For your article to be included here, it will have to be re-written with an encyclopedic tone, and preferably by someone else. If you have any more questions, please let me know. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Question re: Block of User:Josh3580 BOT

Once I have completed the BOT approval process, will I be able to have this username unblocked, or will I need to pick a new BOT name? I am attempting to be as involved as possible in this priceless project! :) Josh3580 (talk) 02:13, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Once it's approved for testing, it will be unblocked by a BAG member, yes. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:59, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

On a side note...

Those IPs aren't him - they're his 4channer/ED eunuchs. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit)} 03:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that got pointed out on IRC. Don't really care either way, though - if they're going to be dicks and copy you-know-who, they get the same as he does, IMO. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:38, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Courageous Persuaders

Thank you for explaining in detail the issues with the previous scholarship page that I had posted. Can you please look at the updated version before I go live to be sure that it will not be deleted again. Courageous Persuaders Thank you again. --Courageo (talk) 20:14, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

That is better in the sense I'm not noticing any copyright violations, but it's still fairly promotional and doesn't talk a whole lot about the program itself. You also need some more third-party references that actually refer to the program - those CDC and DoJ links are great for double-checking the stats, but it's not what the article's about, and it does nothing to confirm that the program is indeed notable. As for writing the article, get rid of the sections you've taken from the DoJ and CDC reports. I know those should be public domain, and thus not a copyright problem, but they don't have anything to do with the program itself and turn the article into a coat-rack that overlaps onto other articles. The article should be about Courageous Persuaders only. Try also to turn the "Steps" section into prose instead of a bulleted list. The Manual of Style can help you out with that somewhat. Next, look for some information on reactions to this program, how the program started, etc.; all the while pulling from third-party sources and not the program website itself.

I'd again ask you to consider not writing this article yourself. It's great that you're willing to put this much work into it, but I'm afraid your involvement with the project may make things difficult for you in keeping the article neutral, and may blind you to other sources that are available to use. If you do wish to continue writing this, however, then the best of luck. I'd also recommend seeking assistance at the new contributor's help page and/or Requests for feedback (although keep in mind they're also going to warn you about the conflict-of-interest thing). Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

About Soffront

I have created soffront page in sandbox. Please see the article and let me know if it is ok to put live.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nuzhatara/Soffront

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nuzhatara (talk • contribs)

Certainly not, that's exactly the same as the article I deleted, and still qualifies for speedy deletion under CSD G11 for advertising. Please review our policies on advertising and neutrality in articles, and revise the article to remove all promotional content. If you have a relation to this company (i.e., you work for them), then you may want to read through this page as well. If you need assistance writing this, I'd recommend asking around at the new contributor's help page after reading through those policies I've linked. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for taking care of that. Exploding Boy (talk) 00:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem, that was simply ridiculous. I'm just not looking forward to the angry unblock message in 5... 4... 3... Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

...Yeah, I've no doubt it's coming. Trying to explain things is how I ended up in her sights too, so you may be in for it... Exploding Boy (talk) 00:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh well. She keeps it up, so can I. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

St. Patrick's Co-Ed Comprehensive College

Please restore St. Patrick's Co-Ed Comprehensive College. Schools should not be speedied under Wikipedia:CSD#A7. If you feel that the school is not notable, please take it to AfD rather than deleting it speedily. --Eastmain (talk) 01:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Hm. So I was just informed. I'll restore it, but in the future please discuss the matter with the deleting admin first before "declining the speedy". Thank you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Evan Sill

Just wanted to let you know that I enjoyed your deletion comment. Carry on. --Mblumber (talk) 01:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

A big Thank you

Thanks for the week of peace you've just made possible. Best, 68.147.60.114 (talk) 01:53, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Kohser

Several other administrators and I are engaging in dialog with TheKohser on his talk page. Do you realize that you protected it as he was Removing people's names, following the lead of the oversited edit, and not adding them? Please unprotect the page. Thank you. --Duk 23:13, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm unprotecting, but please reprotect it if he continues the sort of trolling I was seeing earlier. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank's. This is a touchy situation. On the one hand TheKohser has a way of pushing people's buttons, while on the other his complaints are generally acknowledged to have some validity (even Jimbo suggested a fresh start for TheKohser). So I think continuing a dialog on his talk page is important. --Duk 23:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia page

Nuzhatara (talk) 03:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

I created a page to post on wikipedia for my company and it got deleted couple of times. Now I am not able to post it on wikipedia.I have edited the page and need your feedback. Appreciate all your help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nuzhatara/Soffront

Thanks

Nuzhat

I'd suggest asking for some help at the new contributor's help page - I've already given you suggestions, but you don't seem to have taken them. The article is still promotional in tone and I will not release the title for you to post the article as it currently stands. Sorry for the delay in getting back to you - I've had some emergencies on my end that caused me to take a break for a couple days. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:36, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Angeel56

This user is requesting unblocking, having complied with your {{2nd chance}} request. My policy with these is to refer them back to the admin who gave the 2nd chance. Mangojuice^talk 15:01, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the update - sorry I wasn't around, we had an emergency the other night in my dorm and I've been out a couple days resting from it. I'll reply on his talk page. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Can't get stastus thing to work

I can't get the status thing to work on my user page, can you help me and/of tell me what I am doing wrong??? Thanks!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miagirljmw14 (talk • contribs)

Hey, sorry for the delay, I've been out the last couple days. It looks like it's working for me, and should be for you, although I did notice one minor problem which is now fixed. If the update links still aren't working for you, try clearing out your cache to force your browser to start using the script I had you install. Then, click on one of the colored update links (On, Busy, or Off) and it should change your status page for you. If not, let me know, and I'll take another look at things. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)