User talk:Luna Santin/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Hello there INTP

Hello, fellow INTP. Thanks for the action on the vandal at IP 85.101.13.128. This one did a lot of damage in a very short period of time. Yours, Famspear 23:24, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: omg typo alert

Thanks so much! --WinHunter ^(talk) 23:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You block of User: 66.240.49.132

After inserting warnings on the talk page of 66.240.49.132, I have seen that you have temporarly blocked him. I don't know well how blocking of such users is handled here, but I thought you should know that the blocking didn't really work because he is still vandalizing entries (from other users) in his own talk page. Aetherfukz 23:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up the issue on my talk page :D. Aetherfukz 23:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Cory Lidle

Hi there; I have no wish to appear unduly vindictive, but apart from vandalising my userpage twice (which I immediately reverted) this user appears to have vandalised at least three other pages within about three minutes. You're the boss, but is just a level three warning enough?--Anthony.bradbury 00:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok. I have to say, in my personal view that's a reasonable action.--Anthony.bradbury 00:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I am User:Melchoirs protege. As soon as he nominates me, I will go for RfA. Then I can knock 'em off for myself.--Anthony.bradbury 00:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

That is, quite seriously, most kind of you. Thank you very much.--Anthony.bradbury 00:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Icairns

Thanks for reverting my Talk page abuse - much appreciated. Thanks! Ian Cairns 00:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Teachndick

Hi Luna - there is no such thing as "stepping on my toes" - we work for the same evil empire. Its fine that you unblocked him but I suggest you get him to pick a new username, so as to avoid future problems. Rama's arrow 04:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Rashied Ali

I see you've worked on this guy before; someone added some massive copyright info, totally overwriting an old versoin; can you wipe the contribution out as copyright? -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 20th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 47	20 November 2006	About the Signpost

One week later, Wikipedia reblocked in mainland China	Military history dominates writing contest
News and notes: Wikibooks donation, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
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 06:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

{{unblock|i dont like ebing blocked}}

OMG thats the fricken funniest unblock reason Ive ever seen! i dont like ebing blocked - ahaha! lol :)  Glen  19:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

blanking user talk pages

I reported this problem to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents‎ Somebody has been using a series of IP addresses to systematically blank user talk pages--he hit mine User talk:Rjensen a number of times as well as User talk:Hlj User talk:Kablammo and User talk:Luna Santin and probably others

What the targets all have in common is we strongly protested Stevewk who tried repeatedly to remove all the information about the Civil War from the Abraham Lincoln article. Stevewk was given a 3R suspension but may be using sockpuppets to hit editors. Thus he may be using 70.110.174.121 151.197.233.65 70.110.155.238 70.110.174.121 etc. Rjensen 23:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi, I hit 10,000 edits the other day and to commemorate this momentous (?) occasion, I wanted to leave a note to the various people I've run into on Wikipedia that have made an impact on my time here. Just wanted to say thank you for all the work you do around here and for helping me out. I hope your spacebar is still cooperating. =) -- Gogo Dodo 01:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Special:Contributions/67.177.31.91

If that was a good-faith effort, it was totally botched and gave every appearance of vandalism. I have no objection to an unblock. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 20:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Blocking my I.P. address

Hi recently you blocked an IP address which happened to be mine. I'll keep the details short: had a friend over for project, let friend use computer, friend decided to vandalize wikipedia. Just wanted to make sure that there wasn't too much trouble caused and to request that my IP address be unblocked. Thank for your time, and I appologize for any inconvenience caused. Holocron 18:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Vote

Please vote 67.70.70.33 22:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Happy Turkey Day!

Happy Thanksgiving, Luna Santin!!
- if you happen to be Canadian (like me), just ignore this :) --lovelaughterlife♥ (user|talk) 22:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

request to block 213.42.21.79

This guy here should be blocked for a longer time, say 3 months. All his edits are vandalism. You've blocked him in the past so I thought I could ask you again. Please take action as you see appropriate. This use is nothing more than a silly foolish teenager. I dont think anyone useful will probably use this IP. In banning him for 3 months, we'll be gaining more than losing. --Matt57 23:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message and taking the right decision.--Matt57 14:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Sign your posts

As a courtesy for other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your talk page and user talk page posts. To do so simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments and your user name or IP address and the date will be automatically added along with a timestamp. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion).For further info see the talk page guidelines. Thank you. – Gurch 00:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. – Gurch 00:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. – Gurch 00:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Content Concerns

Dear Luna Santin,

Hello, my name is Jason. I am contacting you on behalf of Gleeson College, in response to the recent notice of information regarding our College, which has been posted on your site without our prior knowledge or consent. What is most concerning to us is the public display of names and inaccurate information regarding our community and business.

In accordance with the Catholic Education Office, and the duty of care we MUST adhere to in protecting our staff, students and community, I find myself in the difficult position of contacting you to request your assistance in removing all information regarding Gleeson College from your site permanently.

While I am unfamiliar with the workings of your site, and the methods of contact which you prefer, I am again attempting to contact you with this serious request.

The direct URL to the said document is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleeson_College

Please assist us in removing this information, as we may find ourselves in a legal bind with stakeholders to the college for the release of private and confidential data.

I hope this may be resolved speedily, amicably and easily, for all concerned.

Respectfully and Sincerely,

Jason Civetta IT Network Manager Gleeson College

Luna, I've still got your page watchlisted from our encouters in RC Patrol, so I saw this note and checked out the article. I immediately made several edits removing irrelevant info from the text. This included the names of non-notable faculty and students, as well as a table of admission fees. I may have missed some material, but that provided an initial clean-up. While the article needs lots of polish and some cites, my current understanding is that all colleges are considered inherenlty notable, and therefore this article would probably not be a candidate for deletion. I'll continue watching both Gleeson College and your talkpage for developments. Doc Tropics 08:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Further note: There may be a little confusion about terminology here. Gleeson is named a college but appears to be a high school. Possibly this is one of those little cultural differences that helps keep WP interesting : ) Doc Tropics 08:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Doc, as an Adelaidian myself, I can tell you that most secondary schools ("high schools") are called colleges (I have no idea why). For one, my school is, and the rest are "[something] Grammar School" if they're not colleges. Weird, huh? Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 02:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Authorise username

If you feel I'm wrong there please go ahead and delete the entry from WP:AIV. Cheers, Tonywalton  | Talk 11:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hehe. "Author-ise" as in "turn into an author". I like it. I had a struggle with an advert once which spoke of
Come to Northumberland, land of leg-
ends
once (hyphenated as shown). Took me ages to work out what a leg-end was - feet? Tonywalton  | Talk

Looks good to me. Tonywalton  | Talk 11:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

User:38.116.192.91

You just blocked User:38.116.192.91 whose only warning in the last month was a {{test}}. The warning before that was on the 11th October. I suggest you unblock them... --Tango 20:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

You also blocked User:61.69.231.96 with no warnings above test2. --Tango 20:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Rvirga

Rvirga created an account with the sole purpose of adding links to his website. We are currently in a situation where 1 out of every ten edits is the addition of a link, and most of these links are spam. As such, we are cracking down. Danny 20:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I think it is naive, however, I am willing to go down to 2 weeks. If he does, however, spam again, I will block indefinitely. Danny 20:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

It cuts both ways

I get harassed as well, yet noone seems to care about that. When I defend myself against such attacks, I'm the one getting threatened. That sounds like Hypocracy to me. Expatkiwi

Thankyou

Thankyou so much I mean realy thankyou you are so going on my respected list. Thankyou!Sam ov the blue sand 23:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

I appreciate you taking the time to undo the autoblock on my account. Thank you! Captain Spyro 06:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

AsteroidAnaconda

I certainly have no objections. The only thing that this user did was to insist on reposting a single-sentence subsub and an unsourced photo, certainly not the most horrendous of crimes. In fact, it'll feel nice to see a user like this unblocked. Thanks so much for letting me know. Back to the break.  :) - Lucky 6.9 02:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 27th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 48	27 November 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles	Steward elections begin
Group apologizes for using Wikipedia name in online arts fundraiser	News and notes: 1.5 million articles, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	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 01:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks from Ungrateful Me

I was just looking through some stuff, and realized that you had reverted vandalism to my userpage awhile back. I don't believe I ever thanked you, so here I am about 15 days later, saying thanks :) ^demon^{[omg plz]} 02:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Luna, I could use some advice

DerStormtroper (talk · contribs)

I'm not entirely sure what I should do with him. He's breaking the rules but doesn't believe he is, despite my citing policy pages, and issuing warnings. Check out his contributions, particularly on userpages and on the RfC for Sugaar.. I'm not sure if I should label him as a vandal, as per WP:AGF, but his activities are somewhat disruptive, and vaguely offensive. I've given him two warnings for vandalizing Sugaar's userpage(he vandalized it once, I warned him, he vandalized it again), and got mad at me for censoring him. I also gave him an NPA for his comment on the RfC for Sugaar. I asked Sugaar not to bother with him, and that I'd take care of troper as best I can, but I'm a little over my head.

I haven't given him a warning for altering other users' comments on Black People, yet... I wasn't sure if I should, as I'd just gotten through warning him for vandalism..--Vercalos 07:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate the help.--Vercalos 07:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

By the way, is it permissible for me to make a subpage for watching users? Or would it be considered trolling? Basically, it's just be a list of users I find suspicious using the {{user}} template, and no messages indicating why they were there. It'd be so I could easily and quickly check their contributions.--Vercalos 07:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

He's still going after Sugaar. He called him a communist, vandal, and POV pusher on the a Request for Investigation for sugar.. I think it's a personal attack but I'm not sure which template to warn him with, as he's been warned for separate things, but only been warned for personal attacks once.--Vercalos 09:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind.. It doesn't matter. He's been blocked, because of his username.. Someone removed all his edits too, for some reason.--Vercalos 20:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense article...

Hello Luna, this patent nonsense article has been up for quite some time. Could you take a look at it please? Thank you.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 08:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

A TFD

Hi - on this TFD, you made a post which seemed to be along the (mostly) accepted consensus (but explained it fully). As I don't know what is the best thing to do to fix the template, would you care to take a look at it and see what you can do (perhaps the wikiproject on user message harmonisation (is that what it's called?) will be interested. Thanks Martinp23 21:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Seabhcan's unjustified block

I've posted comment on this here. Would you be so kind to reconsider your decision? SalvNaut 21:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thankyou for the quick response in my unblocking. It is much appreciated :) SomethingWittyHere 03:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Block needed

Please block DSAFSD for 8 acts of vandalism today to the Thomas Edison article. Thanks Edison 04:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Tone down and remain civil??

I'm sorry, did you just say I can't freely express myself? --Mudel 15:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely not. Wikipedia is not a democracy. Our policies require that you remain civil and refrain from personal attacks. Calling another editor a Nazi violates both of those policies. Luna's warning was exquisitely polite; please consider her advice carefully. Expressing yourself any more freely than you have already might result in a block. Doc Tropics 16:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

There has been a misunderstanding, I haven't called anyone a Nazi, that was User:Adamv88. And this would be an EXAMPLE of me comitting a peronal attack:"You cockass piece of shite, I will fuck you up this bloody instant if you so much as edit a single focking tag that I was responcable for, I will find some extreamly fucked up people to tear you and any sites related to you to fuck, and then I will find out hwere you live, take the next plane there and beat the shit out of you, wait for the cops to arive, beat the fuck out of the cop and bust 6 caps in your ass with his gun, have a good day jerkoff."

What I have been doing was meerly comenting their actions, I am nto angry at anyone, I hate no-one, if there's anything I have to do with disliking it would be their work. I attack edits, not editors. And I do not deem an insult and an attack the same, since I admit I have insulted a few users. And fine, from this point onward I shall remain, civil and I shall refrain (I love this word) personal attacks(though in my opinion I haven't comitted any), I won't call anyone a wanker, tosser, fuck, fuckoff, shit, shit, dick, cock, cunt, bitch, asshole, motherfucker, fanny, slut, whore, Paris Hilton, ho, bastard, wanksta, foo', idiot, dumbass, cretin or any simmilair vulgar sware word/ insult. From now on I will use formal manors of expressing my dislike in ones action and/or edit(unless I'm having a really bad day). Though I doubt that will limit my countless forms of expression or my rebellious tendancy to incorrect claims and actions. Think I'll make a userbox just for this.. --Mudel 16:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, it looks like I misinterpreted this edit summary which reads: "back off image Nazi!", but is actually attached to a reasonable edit. Sorry if I jumped to conclusions, but edit summaries like that are bound to get people's attention : ) Doc Tropics 18:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo 18:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Hobgoblin

please block SqueakBoxx (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log), latest from The hobgoblin (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log), SqueakBox 00:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

RichardBennett new NPA violations.

Hi, you may remember you were going to do a suspend on RichardBennett you said: [1]

He's using his main account again rather than anonymous IP (after being caught engaging in minor sockpuppetry) Anyway...:

[2] see edit summary 'not your fundamental deception'

[3] I see we have a little pest running around here making false claims. The legislation is now referenced for all sane people to see

[4] "lies and slander"

[5] "Restore some balance in the lede as the Wolfkeeper form is guided by a NNPOV." [i.e. he fails to assume good faith]

I may have missed some... WolfKeeper 02:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Wolfkeeper cries wolf

Good move to issue a warning about NPA, but it's not the case that I've ever been banned for it. Kindly correct the false statement you left on my talk page.RichardBennett 11:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The Chirping of Crickets May Be Heard

You once asked me why I hadn't tried Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard to resolve a problem, and I asserted that my experience was that it was a sort of Sargasso Sea. I've tried it again today:

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Problematics edits / Block evasion by Grazon

Note the utter absence of any response by any administrator. —75.18.113.152 04:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Heh, sorry to see that. It's a pretty lengthy report, much longer than I'm used to seeing on there. That's probably why. Unfortunately, I'm bogged down with all sorts of application and schoolwork, this week, so it's hard to focus on anything wiki-related, but if I find a few minutes, I'll see if I can have a look. Luna Santin 06:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you found time, that would be great. But my point is that my repeated experience is that posting there just doesn't do much good. —75.18.113.152 01:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Another admin has, at this time, applied a one-month block to the IP number. This response isn't necessarily more flawed than the other possibilities that occur to me. —75.18.113.152 06:28, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Autoblock(s)

Hey, thanks so much. Quite an experience. Cheers! - SpLoT _{(*T* C+u+g+v)} 09:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

SpLoT _{(*T* C+u+g+v)} has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Misreading of history

Soright ^_^--Mudel 15:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Egg Song

Hello, an article of mine was recently blocked and protected because of "nonsense". This page is not nonsense and if you agree, can you please unprotect it. eskimospy

--disregard the above post. eskimospy^(talk) 17:29, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Protection

[6], SqueakBox 17:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Blocked address

Greetings,

I noticed that I had been blocked on the site and was wondering what the process would be to have my IP unblocked. I appologize for any incorrect steps i have made with regards to any editing on the pages i have used but I am quite unexperienced with this system.

I am slowly learning the process on wikipedia so again, i appologize for any problems i have caused but I would definitely appreciate your assistance in getting me unblocked as I plan on adding things to the site in the future. Also, once I know the reasons you have blocked me I will do my very best to not repeat the problem.

Thanks you kindly —Preceding unsigned comment added by Relentlessllc (talk • contribs) 23:00, 1 December 2006

Hello Relentlessllc. If you can leave a message on this or other talk pages, your account is not blocked. It may be the case that your IP address is softblocked due to it being some sort of a proxy or public access terminal, in which case you simply need to log in to edit, as you have already done. Hope that helps, please let me know if you have any other questions. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 23:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

FYI

You've been blogged. http://www.josesandoval.com/2006/12/wikipedias-auto-blocking-is-wrongly.html Minor accusations of rougeness ("Imagine having all that power in this type of environment. Who knows, maybe someone wrote that Luna smells and he took it out on everyone.") but nothing too bad :) – Gurch 07:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Block on 70.55.0.0/16 IP range

G'day Luna,

You placed a three day block on this user range at 6:38 yesterday for trolling and physical threats. Judging from the mail to the unblock list and this blog entry [7] there seems to have been a number of other people affected. I would be grateful if you could have a look at it.

By the way, thanks for all the work you do on the unblock list and elsewhere for the project. Capitalistroadster 07:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism by AniVar

I had removed the "POV" tag from the Save Indian Family entry as per notice on the Talk page. However, a user "AniVar" has re-instated it, without giving any reasons on the talk page. This is a cowardly attack on the entry, and I request your assistance as an administrator against this vandal.

Kind regards,

My Wikidness 14:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

hafuku somthing or another...vandilism

This person hafuku sunsaku decided that i am not professional enough and deleted content...never bothered to contact me...the content was stand alone. this vandilism is a no no. mabey the block should standor be reinstated.

secondly is cant_sleep_clowns_will_eat_me has no ability to corrispond with and is vandilizing content deletions...without contact...and with no way to receive contact.

thank you...i have a talk page and you may contact me at onekooleskimo@yahoo.com

User:Brutus cassius

This new user would like to be in contact with you about what seems to be a previous IP block but does not know how. See Talk:Sappho#Assessing_recent_major_edit. Wareh 22:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Range blocks

Hi, Luna Santin. Just wondering if you could clarify why you blocked about 851,968 (if I did my math correctly) ips today? I had a logged-in user contact me about being unable to edit due to one of these range blocks, and though the range was blocked anons-only, I asumed good faith and unblocked--there may be a mediawiki bug or the like. Anyway, I'm tempted to undo all of these range blocks (or at least shorten them), as it seems a little inappropriate to block an entire ISP for what may well be the actions of one user, but thought I'd contact you first. If you could please clarify your reasons for blocking these ranges, it would be much appreciated. AmiDaniel (talk) 23:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Your ISP block

Please immediately undo your actions. We at unblock-en-l (as you are probably well aware) have received numerous complaints about this, CAT:RFU is getting flooded with requests, and worst off, no one is able to register an account, so what are we supposed to tell these people exactly? I don't see the rationale behind such a block, and all it's doing is creating unnecessary work for admins and angering many, many innocent users. Please reconsider this block immediately. —Pilotguy (push to talk) 00:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Block

Why block 70.51.11.163? You may have a (bad) habit of blocking IPs but you need to be more careful! Please unblock ASAP the aforementioned IP! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Community (talk • contribs) 16:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

Ya - my ISP is Bell Canada; and you banned most a huge block; is this going to last over the 24h? If it lasts forever then you have just lost a part of this community. Not all bell customers are evil, if you ban bell then why not my work? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.126.185.80 (talk) 3 December 2006

Do you even know what a dynamic IP is? because if not, please learn and then unblock the Bell Canada dynamic IPs you've blocked. one of them is 65.95.108.7. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ShinRaTDR2 (talk • contribs) 3 December 2006.

Why was I blocked?

I rarely edit and do not troll. So, can you tell me exactly what I did in order for you to block me?

Allan 70.50.50.124 01:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Blocked?...

Hi, my IP address was blocked by you, but I have never edited (or have even tried to edit) anything in Wikipedia, ever. I only noticed a block alert today when I accidentally clicked the edit link on a page I was reading. So, if you could kindly unblock my IP address, it would be greatly appreciated. Sorry for any inconvenience, and I hope you understand the situation. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.50.203.242 (talk) 4 December 2006

Re: User talk:Dariosanchez15

Hey, there; looking into this user's unblock request. Would you be wiling to consider decreasing the duration, or unblocking on the condition they avoid that sort of behavior in the future? I'm kind've thinking this one looks more "hapless newcomer" than "malicious vandal," (though sometimes it's hard to tell the difference, in the long run, heh). Just looking for your input or thoughts. Thanks. Luna Santin 04:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll unblock on the basis that this editor is watched for a while, the reason being that I have unblocked in the past and the editor has turned out to be a vandal. (aeropagitica) 05:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the unblock

Thanks for unblocking the dynamic IP addresses assigned to Bell Canada users. I hope whatever vandal was causing problems won't do so in the future. Thanks so much, you rock! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.212.18.131 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

Yeah, I'd like to add my thanks here too. I didn't mean to vandalise those pages, I just didn't fully understand the workings of Wikipedia. Thanks again. Dariosanchez15 12:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Pisgat Ze'ev

As you appear to have taken part in the AN/I discussion on this as an uninvolved admin, i would invite you to review the talk page of this article in full. I do not think there is any consensus in evidence, and therefore no reason to block one side in an edit war but not the other. If anything, the side that drove others off the talk page through personal attacks should be treated with less leniency. Palmiro | Talk 22:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 4th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 49	4 December 2006	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections open	The Seigenthaler incident: One year later
Wikimedia celebrates Commons milestone, plans fundraiser	Wikipedia wins award in one country, reported blocked in another
News and notes: Steward elections continue, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	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 05:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

White Texas?

The page isn't spam and I'm not trying to vandalize Wikipedia. White Texas is a legit music group, I provided a link that verifies the group's existence with samples of the music as well. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Itsawhitetexas (talk • contribs) 22:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

RfC on Mitsos

Hi. I'm acting as advocate for an editor who has been having issues with Mitsos. As part of the DR process, we have opened an RfC in order to get community input on behavior that several users feel is uncivil and biased. Seeing as how you have interacted with Mitsos in the past, we would appreciate any input you may have on the matter. Please visit the Request for Comment page and leave your thoughts. Thanks very much, →Bobby← 15:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

your recent reversion

Dear Luna Santin,

Thank you for your interest in the Theory of Everything article. It is indeed a fascinating subject, concerning the reciprocal of zero. May I ask however, why did you revert the article from the expertise which I added which was requested? Respectfully awaiting your reply, -Archetype

Luna...

Thanks Luna for your reply to my blog entry (http://www.josesandoval.com/2006/12/wikipedias-auto-blocking-is-wrongly.html). I wasn't expecting it. (BTW, I don't know what the rules are with URLs on this comments, so feel free to edit it out).

To some extent, I understand the problems with Wikipedia. And for the issues you outlined, it makes sense to take action. It just baffles me why someone would do that. The wiki is of great service, however, email is of great service and look at how much spam one gets.

In truth, I was annoyed at the fact that I couldn't make a minor correction, and then found out that a whole block of Sympatico users were blocked by you. Nothing personal, I just think the logistics are bit over-reaching.

I ended up creating an account, which in the end will likely be only way to allow people updating wiki pages.

How did you find out about my ranting? I'm just curious. I'm always surprised how the net just connects everyone (not a pun). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Atlacatl (talk • contribs) 18:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

(Luna, if you're still wondering how I did find out, I have a Google Alerts subscription. Anyone blogs about Wikipedia, I know within a few minutes :D) – Gurch 08:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Helpme

Thanks for that help, Luna. --SunStar Net^talk 20:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Luna...

Luna-Santin wrote:

Huh, looks pretty nifty. I should set one up for myself. ;) What "filter" are you using? Luna Santin 08:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Just the word "Wikipedia". Seems to get everything relevant – Gurch 08:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Feedback on {{rangeblock}}

Since you asked – Gurch 13:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Autoblock of BYU IP Address

I'm not sure if you were aware or not, but you autoblocked 128.187.0.165. This address is used by thousands of students at BYU. I know that vandalism is annoying, and hard to stop, but it needs to be handled as carefully as possible. I'm sure this autoblock prohibited more articles from being edited properly then it prohibited vandals from destroying articles.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:128.187.0.164
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:128.187.0.165

Chupper 15:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Yea, I'm not familiar with blocks, thanks for explaining this was not done manually by you. It looks like it was removed pretty quickly, anyway. Chupper 16:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:AIV

hi - I don't see the point in warning IP vandals with test 2 when they've already received several test 4 "final" warnings in recent days - these are school IPs and vandalism is their only contribution. Right, we don't know if it's the same person, but by letting them continue we're showing that our repeated "final" warnings are meaningless. It just makes more work for editors by repeatedly warning them - it takes 2 minutes to set up a user name if someone wants to be constructive. It's your call, but I don't see the point, personally. Just thought I'd mention it. Thanks for the rapid response, anyway, even if I don't agree with yuor action! Tvoz 20:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, good - glad to be of help. I get irritated by these vandals, especially kids. Why not go take a walk or eat an apple, rather than ruin other people's work? Oh well. Thanks for the change - one less, for now. Tvoz 20:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Not sure why you deleted this...

• 72.226.91.79 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) keeps vandalizing article on Barack Obama. Suggest someone semiprotect the article, as this seems to happen with some regularity. --Leifern 20:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC) Let me know why - I'm inclined to reinsert it, but perhaps there's a good explanation. $Insertformulahere$

The "editor" is back again, today. Since it seems that Obama is a favorite target, I'd advise semiprotecting the article. Chances are that this particular politician will get more of this kind of attention going forward. --Leifern 20:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Not sure how to proceed ...

Hello, Luna, I noticed your comments on the Personal Attack Intervention Notice board. I may have a candidate who belongs there, but I'm not sure, so maybe, you have a look: It's user User:HeirToPendragon. While his edits are almost always excellent, his approach, IMHO, tends to be a little bit, uhm, rough. If you have a look: [8], [9]. I contacted him twice on his discussion page and asked him to be, at least, polite and not bite the newbies, but if you have a look at his edit summaries, I'm not sure it worked. [10] Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 00:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Nthn999

Hi, sorry to bother you. Although you blocked the above he is now blanking his page under his user name. Obviously he is circumventing his block somehow. Cheers, Regan123 01:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Aligning a template

Hello, Luna. I'm hoping you may be able to help me, or point me to someone who might be able to. Responding to a {{helpme}} request has gotten me onto a problem I can't seem to figure out. It seems really simple, but I can't figure out how to align a template within an article. The template Politics of the Philippines has an unusual effect in every article that uses it. If used at the top of the article, it becomes full-screen and bumps the body of the article far down-screen to somewhere in the middle of the template. If it is moved to the bottom of the article, then it "behaves" by aligning itself along the right-hand side and not messing with the text. Is there a simple way to use this template so that it shows along the right-hand side, starting at the top of the article, like an infobox? I've tried several things but none of the previews worked the way I was hoping. Thank you for any assistance you can give. SWAdair 08:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, nevermind. I just discovered that we have a Category:User_template_coder. I'll ask one of them. Thanks, anyway. BTW, I thought of you first because of your obvious experience with templates. Happy editing! SWAdair 09:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply

I understand your situation but you have to understand Sympatico (run by Bell Canada) is probably the single largest ISP in Canada. Looking at your range block it looks like you probably ended up blocking hundreds of thousands of users in one of North America's most populous regions. Such range blocks have to be undertaken with caution and shouldn't be more than a few hours at the maximum, 24 hours in extreme situations. Your block was for how long? Three days? That's really not acceptable and I hope you'll keep that in mind in the future. 70.52.196.131 01:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

User Has Been Nominated for block

Not you! , but this user/vandal. Good luck on finals! Bearly541 08:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Why oh why did I have to go to WP:AIV when you were a syops all along? Where's your broom? Bearly541 09:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

What's "Stop, Hammer time?" Bearly541 10:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Lol, I know who MC Hammer is, but I don't know what the banner had to do with vandalism? Bearly541 10:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Can you unblock the semi-protection you kindly gave me as this has calmed right down. Cheers, SqueakBox 00:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Requests for Checkuser Clerkship

I'm pleased to announce that you are being invited to take a position as a Checkuser clerk; please drop me a note on my talk page to confirm your acceptance. It would also be helpful to list yourself as an active clerk, read over the documentation, and add the relevant pages to your watchlist. If you have questions about clerkship, you can ask User:Daniel.Bryant, our Head Clerk. Essjay (Talk) 04:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I listed the page for deletion because I transfered the list {minus the URLs) to another subpage. I don't think anyone else saves URLs like I was, and I was starting to think it wasn't cool, so I transfered them to the favorites in my browser - which is better anyway.

Thanks for noticing and caring:).NinaEliza 12:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Darktrax577 (talk · contribs)

Darktrax577 (talk · contribs) kinda just vandalized your page. Probablly justification for a block. Thanks for the Thank you--St.daniel 21:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

K42 threatening to sockpuppet, also more personal attacks

Note this — coelacan talk — 00:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

And [11] — coelacan talk — 00:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

It appears that K42 is the only one to use that IP. See where K42 reinstates the IP's vandalism, for instance. And I don't see any other edits by that IP that vary from K42's style or choice of articles. — coelacan talk — 00:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Autoblock Removed

I know I've already thanked you, but here is my "official thank you": Thank you for removing the Autoblock. Now I can go back to editing. I hope the vandal doesn't come back. Acalamari 00:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 11th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 50	11 December 2006	About the Signpost

From the editor: New feature
Board of Trustees expanded as three new members are appointed	Wikimedia Foundation releases financial audit
Arbitration Committee elections continue, extra seat available	Female-only wiki mailing list draws fire
Trolling organization's article deleted	WikiWorld comic: "Redshirt"
News and notes: Fundraiser plans, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
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 05:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Not proxy

08:45, 10 December 2006 Luna Santin blocked "82.159.137.19 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 6 months {{openproxy}}

Sorry, but I am not a proxy--Mac 07:10, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

Attacks

TXH is personally attacking me and keeps removing my contributions to help the group I administered.

Please remove his ability to do damage to other people to help keep Wikipedia a better place to be. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.127.167.204 (talk) 12 December 2006

Look. You seem to be a nice guy.

I do not want to be judged around by some newbies like TXH thinking he's some kinda superior, to destroy other's contributions. I am sorry if I offended anyone with my "loser" comment, but I won't tolerate a minor to degrade my work and rudely send me away from Wikipedia.

I really hope you won't be giving this guy Admin tools. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.127.167.204 (talk) 12 December 2006

This user has been attacking me since he keeps using Wikipedia to advertise and keeps filling in his contact info so you can retrieve your product from him.

Please block him, his crass nature and lack of Wiki-etiquette is appalling.

TFX 09:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Please proceed taking further steps to keep TXH away from me and other contributors; to protect sincere users from insults and Wikipedia of being vandalized. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.127.167.204 (talk) 12 December 2006

This user is building a straw man. He is the only one guilty here of vandalization and ad hominem.

Luna, it's obvious that he's using the article to advertise. Can you please block him? TFX 09:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppet?

It seems that my User Page was vandalized again; this time by what is definitely a sockpuppet. User: Opronc-oA is obviously a sockpuppet of User: Opronc. Does User: Opronc-oA or User: Opronc have E-mail activated? I'd like to contact either of to ask about their vandalizing. Maybe I can reason with this User, if that's possible. I'm not angry with this User, I just want to talk. It seems that User: Opronc-oA has been blocked indefinitely Acalamari 20:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I Will E-mail

Thanks for confirming this; I will E-mail them then. This User obviously has a grudge against me, so I'm going to E-mail them. Also, since they're vandalizing got me blocked (as you already know), they must have the same IP address as me (which is worrying). It's because of this that I will try to reason with this User. If I get a reply, may I post(by copy and paste) it on your Talk Page? Acalamari 20:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The E-mail

Here is the E-mail. This is what I sent to User: Opronc-oA.

Dear Opronc/Opronc-oA,

I am Acalamari. Might I ask why you vandalized my User Page, and the User Pages of others? It seems that you had a problem with my "racism." I assure you, my comment on the Michael Richards Talk Page were POINTING OUT different types of slang, not calling anyone by any name. I was not being racist; and, if you read the Talk Page properly, I was fair.

Your vandalizing has led to your blocking. Since you and I seem to have the same IP, your block led to my autoblock. I have been lifted from the autoblock, but you are still blocked.

I don't wish to cause any trouble; I am only asking why you did what you did.

Acalamari

This is the response:

Hey Acalamari, I’m so sorry I vandalized the user pages of users Tra and MadJack (or Jack O’Lantern). I’m also sorry for vandalizing your user page. I vandalized your user page because I was angry at you. That’s all; Im sorry.

Now I want my profiles to be deleted from Wikipedia. I asked users Ryulong and Netsnipe to delete Opronc and Opronc-oA, but they haven’t responded to my emails. I want to be deleted, as my profiles are useless. I shouldn’t have done any vandalism; I was wrong to vandalize. I've asked to be deleted, but they won't delete me! I've been checking my email often to get a response; that's when I found your email! Get someone to delete me!

I am sorry. Opronc/Opronc-oA.

That was all. Acalamari 21:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Did you delete the User Pages or the actual Users? From what I read, Opronc/Opronc-oA wanted to be completely deleted. Acalamari 21:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

User:RunedChozo

Hey, there. Currently, there's some ongoing discussion about the recent events surrounding this user, on WikiEN-l. I'm checking things over, and I haven't been able, just yet, to find evidence to support the allegation of block evasion -- any chance you could help me out in that regard? Thanks in advance! Luna Santin 22:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Look at the recent contributions for 70.114.237.14 (talk · contribs). It's quite clear it's him since he's talking in the same fashion and given this comment where he references his talk page being blocked. I suppose a checkuser can be done to confirm this. -- tariqabjotu 22:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Hrm. Looks like 70.114.237.14 and RunedChozo have very similar behaviors, the way I'm reading it. No objection if we want a checkuser on this -- if there may be other users involved, being safe couldn't hurt. Luna Santin 23:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm working on the checkuser request right now (it's actually an addendum to another checkuser request from earlier). -- tariqabjotu 23:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

hello Luna

i was reading the mailing list about the RunedChozo incident... i'm not sure how to reply to current discussions (i just signed up to it), so i was thinking i would request you to convey all i had to say on the matter (i had already explained this on AN/I).

if that edit summary is looked at by itself, then no it doesn't match up with my revert. if, however, you consider RunedChozo's behaviour on that page then you may understand the reasoning for that summary. every revert by RunedChozo had been a revert to this version (bar an extra sentence which i will cover in a moment), which was the insertion of subjective (and yes, unsourced) OR. now, RunedChozo had been persisting in re-inserting this sentence: it was only five reverts after his original insertion that he added an additional sentence starting with "Source:..". this is rather inconsequental: the sources do not substantiate the claim, so it remains OR; and he would not be in a position to verify it unless he is fluent in Arabic, which i do not believe he is. i didn't see his insertion of these sources: someone else had reverted it before i'd had a chance to look at it. when RunedChozo had come back from his three day block and resumed reverting to self again (11 Dec), i merely assumed that he was reinserting the same OR again (which he was), not knowing that he had added a pseudo-'source' to it. had i known that he was also misrepresenting sources i would not have described his OR insertion as 'unsourced'. i may have been wrong, yes, but i certainly was not lying. i hope that clarifies the issue. by the way, i do not know future perfect (i have addressed him on two separate occasions only)- i contacted him when i had found RunedChozo puppeteering (User:Wheelygood), because he had been involved in the 3RR discussion here.

if you could put that up on the list Luna, i would be very grateful.. thank you. ITAQALLAH 23:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

yes, please. just copy paste all of that. thank you :)

I am too existant!

There seems to have been some error here. Please reverse. I may have screwed up the move last night, but I'm really me. The page should be attached to user:Fabartus\Wet noodle award, which also seems to have been tossed into the bit bucket by you. Did I use the wrong slash in userfying it??? Others have been invited in, so that's no surprise.
   See the subtopic title of the same name. I pulled this off Tfd last night so as to not waste people's time. But there will be others looking in, as the issue is a good one to figure out how to attack. Thanks // FrankB 02:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Theplanetsaturn & Tenebree

I'll do as you suggest. I admit I'm surprised that one can say "lets take a look at your lies," "Perhaps it is the stink of your hypocrisy," and "you are a poor judge of character should rethink your career, Mr. Journalist." You truly don't those personal attacks? --Tenebrae 03:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, the Theplanetsaturn wrote this at Talk:Jhonen Vasquez: "WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU ECTO??!!!! Who gives a shit, ducky?"... -- Theplanetsaturn 02:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC). I don't think it's right that he's allowed to do this to not just to me but to others. --Tenebrae 03:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

My Ban

I believe I was unfairly banned. A couple of Indian users have hijacked a thread and they are putting in information based on biased Indian sites. I pointed this out and told them no credible source confirms what they are putting in the articles. They ganged up on me, and contacted another Indian mod who banned me for "personal attacks", when in fact these Indian users had come up with more personal attacks aimed at me. I think this is really unfair, and apart from this ridiculous ban, the articles are being edited by Indian users to fit their personal views. A non India user has NO CHANCE to reason, argue, or even as much as question their actions.

Please read the discussion here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:P%C4%81%E1%B9%87ini

I explained my position extremely well, but it proved to be impossibly hard to make them read it. Their comeback for ignoring everything I say is that, "they are not required to read blogs"

Most of their evidence is based on "blogs" and "blogs" in other words are peoples opinions. The blog being referred to in the discussion was mine.

Please let me know how I can sort this out. They are hijacking history articles which in no way are related to them. And I was effectively banned for just arguing with them, by another Indian mod I might point out.

User:Unre4L

Am I to assume academic university sources are now "blogs"?Bakaman 23:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Your sites are Indian websites, articles are written by Indian so called historians, most of them made by random individuals, and if I wanted to ask you a question, I would have posted it on your talk page. You got me banned for something you did way more than me.

Excuse me if I dont exactly feel like "discussing" with you guys anymore.

Unre4L 00:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply - did you read the source? its not even an Indian person thats the head of the linguistics dept, its a Bulgarian. "So called historians" (lol), if you define "so called" as actual historians then yes, all I'm doing is quoting "random individuals".Bakaman 16:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Clarification: I blocked User:Unre4L for 3RR on Pāṇini, not for personal attacks. -- Samir धर्म 06:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Clarification: You blocked me for re-editing text which your fellow mates have changed once again. Take a look at the article. Its supposed to be "Pathan" instead of ancient indian. I have already told you guys ancient indian cant be used to describe anyones origin.

Unre4L 14:11, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Please refer to WP:3RR as to the reason why you were blocked. I have no idea about your content dispute -- Samir धर्म 22:59, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

RfC, WP:PAIN, and now the discussion page for Emergence

This needs an admin to jump in. You asked for more links in WP:PAIN to support Fourdee's accusations. He has used this as an excuse to advocate and dispute what reviewers/admins have commented on that page (in violation of the instructions at the top of the page which explicitly state not to do this). In addition, he has created an RfC on the same issue and has turned the discussion page for Emergence into yet a third platform. That's three seperate pages all trying to make the same case - two of them (the WP:PAIN content and the content on the discussion page of Emergence) in direct violation of policy. I am bringing this to your attention because he is using your statement, " If you can establish this as part of a greater trend, in an RfC, or link to some more severe comments, I may be more inclined to take some action" as an excuse to do so. I am requesting that, rather than distract the discussion page of Emergence from its intended use (discussing how to write a better article on Emergence) and rather than distracting the WP:PAIN page from its intended use (as clearly stated in the instructions at the top of that page), that all of this drama be consolidated into one location (which, as I see it, is probably an RfC).-Psychohistorian 16:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

THANK YOU

thank you tank you thank you thank you thank you thank you... ok, enough with that... ok, just one more THANK YOU FOR UNBLOCKING ME!!!!! your the greatest. i want to do something nice for you. if you ever have a request just tell me and it will be done before you can type "thank you" o and thank you.J.L.Main 20:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Avenger's Lament

You said: "Checkuser results are in; see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Chadbryant. Seemed like you'd want to know."

Yeap, I saw that. And this guy had the nerve to demand an apology, in advance, when the results came in. I really need to be just a bit less gullible. --Yamla 22:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For your tireless hard work and great help in sysop tasks, it is my honour to present you with barnstar. ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 22:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Question

Hello, how does one add their signature to comments? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TomGreen (talk • contribs) 09:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

Thanks Tom 09:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi! Thanks for reverting all those edits in L.A.M.B back! To tell you the truth I thought the article had always been vandalism (so I marked it with db tags), but apparently it had a much earlier revision that wasn't vandalism which I didn't notice. Cheers! Yuser31415 20:12, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Plessy v. Ferguson

vandal is so boring, isn't he? West Brom 4ever 21:14, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

A Question

Hi, I was wondering if it's possible for non-admins to promote lists at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates, because a list i've been trying to promote has been there for 15 days and the admin who is most active there hasn't been very active recently. Thanks, -- Scorpion 22:07, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Darktrax577

Just a question but when you blocked him did you really block the whole IP or is he just trying to get back to Trolling? Thanks jsut wondering.--St.daniel 22:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)