User talk:Slakr/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

User:X3210

I have placed a post at An/I in regards to the actions taken against this user. I feel that the users actions are somewhat mitigated by an incorrect application of policy by the original admin who reverted the users blanking of his own page and that the issue escalated from there and was somewhat hasty and unfair on the part of the other admins involved. Thank you.Awotter (talk) 06:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your help and I'm glad the user contacted you and apologized.Awotter (talk) 08:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

'tis my pleasure. He seemed like a good editor anyway, so if he was honest in his apology (and I think he was), all will be right in the world once more. :D Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 08:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

User Page targetted by stalker

Hello Slakr. A while ago, I reverted a few edits by User:767-249ER, who was vandalising Sydney suburb articles. Since then, he has been harassing me and my user page. Since the user was blocked, he has tried to create a number of Sock Puppets and make edits anonymously. You helped to identify him and block. I believe he has just returned again and considering the edits he has made to my user page is posing as an administrator to continue to harrass me. Can the address he is using be blocked or is there something else that can be done? Thanks J Bar (talk) 06:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I applied some sock-b-gone. Cheers. =) --slakr^\ talk / 06:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I think it's better if I stay out of sending him any more warnings to avoid feeding his vendetta. I appeciate your help. Cheers J Bar (talk) 21:31, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

SineBot

I would propose that SineBot does not sign comments on talk pages when they are ABOVE the first section. (diff)— Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (talk) 14:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I had a notice from Sinebot after I managed to lose my signature whilst trying to sort out an edit conflict on WP:AIV. No big deal, but I do know to sign! Mjroots (talk) 18:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

BRC

Welcome to the BRC! We've recently opened membership up to the editing community at large, so if you know any badasses, feel free to invite them. GlassCobra 07:19, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

- TRANSMISSION ENDS -

Muhahaha. Eeeeexcellent! Everything is going perfectly to plan. I shall start the Nymphs of Nod upon the task of forging new bathrobes for the legions starting RIGHT NOW! I HAVE THE POWER!!! Muhahahah— cough...cough...hack...wheeze...gasping for breath.

Uhh... on second thought, I've got a lot of work to do, so may be not "right now"... maybe tomorrow...

sneezes ... or next week...

notices he popped a capillary in his eyeball while evilly cackling ...or maybe...

...month... Heh. Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 07:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Yikes. Don't hurt yourself. :P GlassCobra 08:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Damnit, you don't look Romanian! Wait until I'm in... dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 09:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

CosineBot?

Is something going on with your bot performance lately? I am totally used to SineBot putting the small-print in before I get anywhere and I may have seen some dropouts lately. I seriously doubt I'm getting any faster... Franamax (talk) 12:31, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, actually I wrote a new feature that ignores possible vandalism and echos to antivandalism channels. That way it's easier for vandalfighters to revert vandalism. --slakr^\ talk / 12:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I thought I had a second confirmation but I'll bail out on that one. However Talk:Marc Emery has some conspicuously lacking sig edits. The talk text on it's face is confused because of IP refactoring but the edit history doesn't show SineBot at it's usual prompt activity. Maybe I'm just imagining things and I expect too much from the bot, last day or two seems different somehow... Franamax (talk) 12:48, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Pietervhuis unblock

Sorry but I'm just pointing out that I didn't violate the 3RR rule while User:Pietervhuis did, I was not the only user he reverted, he also reverted User:Caesar Augustvs if you look at the diffs and article history, so essentially he got away with violating the 3RR, and right after getting off a block-

• 1st revert: 14:10, 5 February 2008
• 2nd revert: 14:42, 5 February 2008
• 3rd revert: 14:49, 5 February 2008
• 4th revert: 14:50, 5 February 2008
• 5th revert: 14:55, 5 February 2008.--Miyokan (talk) 16:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I definitely understand, and I've made it clear that he doesn't actually even need to technically violate the three revert rule to be blocked; however, it would also seem that there are multiple disagreements in the page's edit history that seem to be resorting to undos and reverts instead of building consensus from multiple people (e.g., [1], [2], etc). Overall, the regular editors on the page seem to be in general disagreement about multiple things. I would suggest that the talk page be used to sort it all out. Cheers. --slakr^\ talk / 16:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Cascading Protection.

Ouch, right, forgot about that. :/ · AndonicO ^Hail! 11:45, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Sinebot suggestion

Could SineBot be taught to link to [[Special:Contributions/Username|Username]] rather than to [[User:Username|Username]] in its edit summaries (where it says, "signing comment by ...")? Especially for IP edits. Thanks, Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The setting is available in the bot to allow contribs-only format (i.e., no talk link), and is enabled on Wikinews. However, it's disabled here due to WP:SIG requiring either a user page or user talk page link. --slakr^\ talk / 09:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply - but is there a misunderstanding here? I'm not talking about what SineBot writes on the page, I'm talking about its edit summaries. I think at least IPs should be listed here by contrib links, just as they are in normal revision histories. I don't see how WP:SIG comes into that. The point is, if you see an anon's edit pop up on your watch list, you can go directly to the anon's contrib history to check if it's a constructive anon or a vandal. If you have an anon's edit superceded by SineBot and only SineBot's edit summary pops up on your watchlist, you only get the redlink to the anon's user page, which is useless 99.5% of the time. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

And by the way, even WP:SIG#Dealing with unsigned comments explicitly recommends signing IP contribs with contrib rather than userpage links. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I might be missing something, but Wikipedia:SIG#Internal_links says otherwise. If I'm blind, please correct me. --slakr^\ talk / 11:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

By the way, this isn't about whether it's okay to use contributions or not; it's that the talk page needs to be included if someone chooses to use the contribs (or other) link instead of a user/user talk page. --slakr^\ talk / 11:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem with using both the contribs and the talk link on the page. That's what SineBot is doing, that's what {{unsignedIP}} does, and that's what WP:SIG recommends. Fine. But I'm still primarily talking about the edit summaries, not the sig on the page. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh wow *smacks forehead*. I am soooo sorry. I thought you were talking about the actual detection of signatures and such. I'll implement that asap. LOL, sorry about the mixup. :P I'm so used to seeing people complain about the bot not detecting their exotic signatures that I totally didn't see that you meant the edit summaries. :P --slakr^\ talk / 11:23, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh, no problem, thanks :-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

school and such IP addresses

hello Slakr, either I'm annoying or your glad people come to you for answers.(you happen to be the easiest to find that I know knows something) When reverting vandalism or advertising from wikipedia and then seeing on whois that the IP address belongs to a school (your telling me you don't wonder where there coming from) should I e-mail the network admin mentioning it, or is that allowed. Also if I should, at what level of vandalism? Thank you for your time--Pewwer42  Talk  01:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, I instinctively run a whois on an anon if it's doing something questionable or if I'm about to block it. In the case of 160.7.155.215 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), it doesn't really look like overt spamming (i.e., it's not commercial/doesn't have a link); so, it's probably just some kid who doesn't realize the scope of wikipedia (i.e., that our calendar days aren't for general announcements). You're free to contact an abuse team any time you want, but I usually don't waste my time unless there's an extensive history of vandalism or there's something ominous (like someone threatening to "never stop" or the like); then, I simply shoot over a form letter to their abuse department and let them deal with warning (or, if they've been really bad, terminating) the offender's account. Of course, I'd avoid being too quick to pull those triggers, as if the abuse isn't obvious/severe enough, and the abuse team has no reason to care (i.e., if you're not abuse staff from another network/ it's not an issue of copyright), then you'll prolly just get ignored, since they get bajillions of silly, trivial reports. :P --slakr^\ talk / 09:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

That deleted contributes thing looks useful, but its for admins only.. dangling candy that I just can't reach , how cruel ;) --Pewwer42  Talk  04:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Pic

That was your idea! Remember? You showed me this one and suggested I modify it. My modifications are kind of pollywollycrappy, but it'll have to do until I can get a brainscan pic.  :) Anyhow, thanks for the idea! :D delldot talk 21:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

SineBot Suggestion

Any chance we might see an opt-out feature that only opts out of date signing for when we use ~~~ instead of ~~~~? Spud ^Hai/_watidone 03:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to the Jungle

WP:BRC

Please accept your honorary Bathrobe Cabal Slippers... Of Doom!

Welcome brother, to our Bathrobe Cabal. Please familiarize yourself with the aims of the The Illustrious and Honorable Bathrobe Cabal of Wikipedia.

As is customary, the welcome song shall be sung:

Welcome to the jungle! We got fun n' games, We got everything you want. Honey, we know the names. We are the people that can find - Whatever you may need. If you got the money honey; We got your disease. In the jungle! Welcome to the jungle! Watch it bring you to your shunn,n,n,n,,n,n,,n,n,n,,n,n,,n knees, knees; I wanna watch you bleed!

If you have a suggestion for the advancement of the Bathrobe Cabal of Wikipedia; or a country you would like to see invaded, please direct your comment to the Bathrobe Cabal diabolical discussion page. Stay Frosty! Dfrg_msc 05:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

- TRANSMISSION ENDS -

Dude, you're like three sections late! dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 09:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Dude, you're like three sections gay! Dfrg_msc 07:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it seems like all of the closet case vandals come to my talk page in order to vent their sexual frustrations, like this one in the archives. :P Maybe they're secretly wanting me to go, "OMG! How'd you know?" and then the vandal goes, "umm, well, I errrmmm... I thought about it too," and then buttsecks ensues. I suppose that's what perceived anonymity brings out of people— the things they can't say to their cute friend in real life. ;) --slakr^\ talk / 12:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Ahahahaha! delldot on a public computer talk 03:48, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

204.185.204.203

THank you but Umm you blocked them for a period of null....how long is that?--Pewwer42  Talk  17:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Lol, I must have accidentally escaped out of my popup box for the notification. It's 1 week. :P --slakr^\ talk / 17:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Pergamon

Hey I figured out your name, you slak from your job to edit wikipedia, no? ah well it was a guess. Anyway theres this article called Pergamon that seems to be having a dispute and only one side seems willing to discuss it on the talk page. The other side is a revolving IP address in Turkey (see the whois info [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]) I tried to get the page protected twice, the first time "not enough recent activity" the second time "borderline vandalism revert and warn" the second one might work but as I said it is a revolving IP address. So any Ideas?(Its not even a big disagreement, just over where and what a city is...hmmmm)--Pewwer42  Talk  18:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh, actually I work at the same time as editing. I don't really keep 9-5 hours, but rather work a little, edit a little, work more, edit a little, etc. it's actually quite enjoyable. :P As for the page, I've semied it and dropped a note on the talk page. Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 20:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, and I can't imagine what you do for work, but if your allowed to edit wikipedia during that time, sounds like a keeper. As to the section below, you are in the twilight zone and must constantly revisit your past.lol--Pewwer42  Talk  23:38, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Jay Brannan

You may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jay Brannan. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ ^echo 20:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Jay Brannan

You said:

Hi there. I noticed you made an edit to Jay Brannan while it was in a protected state due to edit warring over that exact same subject (the verifiably sourced gay status and the Flickr creative commons attribution-licensed image, which is non-revocable and was verified before it was taken down by the copyright holder). If you feel that that edit should stick, though, you might consider dropping the full protection down to a semi, otherwise people might start complaining that you took a side or something. :P Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 21:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

The reason I made the edit was per an OTRS complaint, ticket number 2008020210003368. Whether the material goes in again or not is open to question (and may be moot if the article is deleted), but it looks to me form the history as if it was reinserted knowing that the subject did not want it there, almost as an act of spite; that's certainly how it looked to the subject. So, let's see it it gets deleted or kept, and then decide how to proceed in a way that does not cause the subject to believe, as he currently does, that Wikipedia does not care how much hurt and distress we cause him. If it's kept, I'll ask for your help to make the article less offensive to the subject, yes? Guy (Help!) 21:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, part of the problem is that I'm not even sure that this person is who he says he is. He claims that the gay thing isn't accurate, but he's pretty open about his sexuality on his official site, so I'm holding this person's claim of actually being the subject lightly. Whoever this person is (maybe a publicist trying to erase the past?), however, was possibly editing with a COI, and was likely tenditiously editing via 162.84.242.196 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and 162.84.234.178 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), violating the 3RR in the process while using socks despite being warned; so, the readdition of the information was likely done not in spite but in defiance of perceived vandalism to the page.

Though, since I don't really care about the article, I could just as easily wave bye bye to it :P I just didn't want the vandals to get the upper hand nor or let some guy tread all over COI guidelines because he doesn't like visitors to Wikipedia to know that he's gay despite happily publishing that fact on both his website and multiple major gay magazines as publicity. It just kind of seems... wrong— but that's just me. :P --slakr^\ talk / 21:45, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Translation drafts

Foreign language translations are ususally done on a subpage of Wikipedia talk:Translation and I see SineBot signing several edits on the Airmail draft page when they are unneeded. Maybe you can stop it doping these types of pages? Thanks ww2censor (talk) 22:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not seeing that many pages that use the Wikipedia talk: namespace in that way. I suppose I could make a Category:Talk pages with subpages that are NOT automatically signed, but it seems like one could just use {{bots|deny=SineBot}} instead. I'll put the feature for auto subpage deny lists on the to-do list though. --slakr^\ talk / 00:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

My latest(ok first real) article

Hey, slakr, could you please look at my new article on the Basilica of Sts. Peter and Paul and tell me what you think? ALso while your there could you... you know, correct any spelling errors and links and stuff I may of missed. Thank you very much, Hasta la Pasta--Pewwer42  Talk  09:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe a better question would have been what is required to reach at least good article status?--Pewwer42  Talk  21:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

No idea— I'm not a huge article writer :P. You might check out featured article status, as generally "good articles" tend to be a couple of things shy of featured articles afaik. --slakr^\ talk / 01:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

SineBot

How would a user sign a comment they spot the same way SineBot does? Thanks. Cheers. Earthbendingmaster 02:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I took the freedom to answer for you at his talk page :-)-- ReyBrujo (talk) 23:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Signing when not needed

Check here, I copied and pasted a comment a user added in the article itself, appending the {{unsignedip}} template with the user ip as signature. However, the bot did not recognize the template, and signed me. Is it possible for the bot to skip signing in these circumstances? Cheers! -- ReyBrujo (talk) 23:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti.

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti., suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Franz Wilhelm Rabaliatti.. slakr^\ talk / 00:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

o rly? :P --slakr^\ talk / 00:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

user page for spam?

so umm you might want to talk a look at this. riiight and don't forget to see the history page--Pewwer42  Talk  06:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

SineBot source

Hi there! Have you already published your bot's source code? I would like to see it on Polish Wikipedia, working as hard as it does here. ;) Hołek ҉ 10:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikiscient (talk) 22:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC) -- problem with Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation_popups

That seems to have done the trick! (Must have been some script-blocking issue on my end, or something -- I will try to get that resolved without having to bother you again about this... )

Thank you very much!

Wikiscient (talk) 22:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

3RR

There seems to be and edit war on the Hillary Clinton page between User:Frank Lofaro Jr. and User:Wasted Time R thought you should know--Pewwer42  Talk  22:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Some notifications

Hi,

I saw you were having issues previously with User:Pietervhuis. Now, my concern is that the user is engaging in revert warring again, sometimes without explanation in edit summaries and talk pages. I'm making this notification in a bid to avoid doing a 3RR by me but also by this user. Cheers! --TheFEARgod (Ч) 00:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

My edits to junior college

Neigh! Did you even read what I wrote? I am trying to rewrite a horrible article. You should offer me a carrot, not revert my edit as vandalism. --NotAHorse (neigh!) 11:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

replied --slakr^\ talk / 11:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Edit to Cappadocia

For Cappadocia, Esbelli Evi is what Ice Hotel is for Sweden. This place was selected as one of the best in the world, a unique place with 2000 years old cave rooms. I have stayed at this place and believe they deserve a link from Wikipedia. So do not threaten me and try to understand that this is not an advertisement or anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.197.237.117 (talk) 10:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

You saw a warning/block message that I sent to someone else who shared your IP. It's safe to ignore it. --slakr^\ talk / 16:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Sinebot

Didn't seem to like the [[en: in the signature, /me thinks. Mønobi 22:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Blocked User:767-249ER has returned as 122.106.83.63. My user page is being constantly vandalised now and there has been other vandalism from this address. Can you please block? J Bar (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I think you blocked the wrong guy, it was User 122.106.83.63 not User 122.106.63.212--Pewwer42  Talk  04:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

they're likely the same person. Harryboyles blocked *.63 --slakr^\ talk / 16:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I know, I reported him, after you apparently went to bed. I thought wikipedia editors never sleep?--Pewwer42  Talk  18:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Feb 08

Whoops. Sorry. Hehe. Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 17:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Not a usernamevio?

I would like to encourage you to take another look at this: [12], which you claimed was not a username vio. First of all, the editor is apparently engaging in disruptive editing at Allegations of state terrorism committed by the United States, and is quite obviously a reincarnation of the now username blocked User:Ultrastoopid. The reason this is clearly a username vio is that one of the regular editors, User:Ultramarine, has a username similar to that of User:UntimelyMaroon. Furthermore, in case you are not a native speaker of American English, the word "Maroon" is a slang term meaning the same thing as stupid. The username thus falls squarely under "Disruptive usernames" and "Offensive usernames." I have encouraged the user to select a name which is not based on that of User:Ultramarine. He/she appears not to have payed attention. Silly rabbit (talk) 17:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

You might consider WP:RFCU. "UntimelyMaroon" is not blatantly similar to "Ultrastoopid." If it's an issue of sockpuppetry, consider suspected sockpuppets or requests for checkuser. --slakr^\ talk / 17:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The sockpuppetry is not so much of a concern as the disruptiveness of the username. Anyway, they are the same account. WP:SNOW: Ultrastoopid showed up earlier today, was blocked, and moments later UntimelyMaroon was editing the same page, using the same rhetoric (involving lots of uses of the word "Dude", exclamation points, etc.) Finally, both usernames are clearly targeted at User:Ultramarine, as are the users trolling posts on the article talk page. Silly rabbit (talk) 17:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

In the time you've spent arguing my reluctance to block someone for a username violation (keep in mind, I'm used to blocking usernames for things like "AssholeJim" or "BuyOurProductInc"), you probably could have gone through the appropriate channels. You'll understand my reluctance to deal with a non-blantant username block. --slakr^\ talk / 17:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: 84.188.169.29

Just wanted to let you know that this IP also vandalized User:John Carter's user page per this edit. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 19:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

T'was already blocked. Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 20:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Church fathers

I recently received a message from SineBot regarding early letters of the Church fathers, and I would be delighted to help. As you maintain SineBot, I assumed the message must have actually come from you. The e-mail address left in the message did not work, and my e-mail was rejected by the server. If you still require help, contact me on my Talk Page. Again, I'd really be glad to be of service. User: Two-face Jackie.

Huh? SineBot doesn't give out an email nor does it actually talk about anything. It will only sign comments using {{subst:unsigned}}, {{subst:unsignedIP}}, or {{subst:undated}}, and the only time it will seemingly "talk" is to notify people that they've been leaving a lot of unsigned comments by dropping {{subst:tilde}} on their User talk: pages. You might be confusing something another user said and SineBot (talk · contribs) later signed. Check out the page history on the given talk page to see who actually left the comment (it'll be the contribution directly preceeding SineBot's. --slakr^\ talk / 21:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Cottage pie.

Hi the Talk:Cottage pie is still misdirecting, can you correct the move of that too. This did get badly mangled! GameKeeper (talk) 10:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Just noticed you are the SineBot owner. I love that thing, so useful. GameKeeper (talk) 10:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

et voila. :) --slakr^\ talk / 10:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I need Sinebot

Is there a way that you could direct Sinebot to my talk page? There is an unsigned comment that was left there by a user we are pursuing a sockpuppetry case against. Thanks. -- Elaich ^talk 22:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The user explicitly altered the signature after the bot had already added it. --slakr^\ talk / 23:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

interesting, very interesting........

Hello Slakr, I have found another user of interest for you to look into. Jajhill seems to be going through pages changing things such as 7^th to 7th (such as in this is the 7^th president) I don't know if this actually matters but it seemed rather odd. Here is there contribute page. --Pewwer42  Talk  01:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Weird. It looks like several people have descended upon the user. I'll keep an eye on it. --slakr^\ talk / 06:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting that nonsense on my user page! He's quite the immature little troll. Thanks again~! -Sukecchi (talk) 01:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Re a SineBot automatic sig at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abandon Productions

Hi,

I transferred a comment by a new user from Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Abandon Productions to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abandon Productions, and your bot went in afterwards and noted that I had left the comment unsigned. I didn't want to sign it, because it wasn't my comment. I have undone it. How do I stop that from happening again? -- Roleplayer (talk) 03:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Use !nosign! in the edit summary or one of the other opt out methods on its user page. --slakr^\ talk / 03:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

OK cheers. -- Roleplayer (talk) 03:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you very much for reverting the vandalism on my user page. Believe it or not, it's the fourth time today that a sockpuppet of V-Dash has done that to my page. MelicansMatkin (talk) 05:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hello. Which user are you refering to? I'm doing a lot of warning and anti-vandal patrol right now. Colleenthegreat (talk) 06:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Block of Stone put to sky

I'm reviewing this unblock request, and I'm baffled. I don't understand which page the user is supposed to have been edit warring on; I checked out both Allegations of state terrorism committed by the United States and Meir Weinstein; I found a couple of reverts but certainly not more than 3 on any day in recent history. I saw some new accounts and some IPs on the Allegations page but none of them looked like sockpuppets. This is clearly a complicated situation. What happened here? Mangojuice^talk 17:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Stone put to sky

FYI: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser#Attack_accounts showed an other sock. I don't know under which evidence you blocked him, but I thought I'd let you know :). -- lucasbfr ^talk 18:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Modern Hovercraft Development

Thanks for the input on (no signature). Will be sure to sign all following in puts !Razorback 1 (talk) 19:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

SineBot

I think the bot is acting up a little. its signing post that have already been signed β^_command 19:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

you broke parsing of wikilinks by not closing the open brackets, so it didn't recognize the rest of your post as being a signature. --slakr^\ talk / 00:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Tony Sidaway

Could you check this talk page, please? I've got it set up with the following bots template:

{{bots|allow=HagermanBot,Shadowbot3,Werdnabot,TonyBot,MiszaBot III}}

But user:SineBot is still editing that page. Could you find a way to make it stop, please? --TS 16:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

HagermanBot == SineBot, or at least, so it thinks. Simply remove HagermanBot and SineBot will no longer edit the page. --slakr^\ talk / 22:12, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. --TS 22:21, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Slavic IAL

This page was deleted and the reason cited was that it was a copy of a page that was nominated for deletion. This is incorrect. I wrote the page for the first time, and there hasn't been a Page on the international languages based on the Slavic language family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ekstazo (talk • contribs) 02:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

The only component of the article was a recreation of the contents of Slovio. --slakr^\ talk / 02:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

But there was no recreation, as I wrote the article. And why shouldn't there be an article on Slovio? Ekstazo 03:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ekstazo (talk • contribs)

It's not recreation of the article name that counts-- it's recreation of the article itself that was subject of an articles for deletion debate over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slovio (2nd nomination). I felt that your page did exactly that, so I deleted it. (see also: criteria for speedy deletion of recreated material). --slakr^\ talk / 03:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Hezbollah dispute

Hello Slakr, we have resolved the Hezbollah dispute, please check here, is there a chance to remove the page protection now? (Imad marie (talk) 10:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC))

New vandalism

ur a fukin n00b ill pwn u at any game u bitch! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.183.38.50 (talk) 23:16, 20 February 2008

I have no doubts that you would. However, Wikipedia is not that fun of a game, so you might consider Pacman or something similar. Who knows— if games really do effect kids, then you might find yourself running around in the dark, eating everything in your path while listening to repetitive music. --slakr^\ talk / 23:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

ahahahahahaha. Enigma ^msg! 03:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

xerpi page deleted

Xerpi page was deleted again. please reactivate this page; it was objective, sourced, and notable (I described three ways in which it was a innovative social bookmarking tool social bookmarking is relevant to wiki!) There are 19 other 'notable' wiki articles about competing bookmarking sites (see list_of_social_software#Social_bookmarking which would be a perfect niche for the Xerpi article.

I stated this point in my contest to the speedy deletion; which was not replied to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mollymeghanmiller (talk • contribs) 15:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

your a facking b!tch and i hate you, you facker —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zaid12 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way. As a result, I have taken the liberty of helping you to rid yourself of me for the time being. It's the least I can do. --slakr^\ talk / 23:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Sinebot

Sinebot signed a comment that i had already signed with the four tildes. Why?I am sooooo cool! 22:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Your signature points to User:IslaamMaged126, not your current user name. --slakr^\ talk / 00:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo and Serbia

Same edit war. Same problem. See Talk:Serbia. 204.52.215.107 (talk) 06:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

SineBot

Hi. SineBot has signed several Talk page posts that I had already signed. Here are a couple of diffs: Talk:Black people, User talk:209.217.86.26.

I don't know if it matters, but my signature is "— {{SUBST:User|Malik Shabazz}}".

It's not a big deal, it's a little annoying and I thought you should know. Thanks. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 18:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

It's getting worse. Now SineBot signs every message I sign, so I've opted out of it. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 00:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik Shabazz (talk • contribs)

Lol, that's 'cause now you're using interwiki links. Anyway, cheers. :P --slakr^\ talk / 01:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello

I would appreciate it if you could review my case at WP:AN/3 against User:Twsx. I realize it was you who blocked me before, which is part of the reason I ask for your help now. Twsx has been edit warring at least since august of last year on two pages with me and many other users having to revert him. He has been warned, but continues to be disruptive. He will not stop. Perhaps if some punitive action is taken against him we can all move on and learn something from this. Twsx seems to think I've made this report in bad faith. That is a lie. Yes, he did report me and get me blocked. Yes, he does seem to try and get me in trouble whenever possible (since I first came to wikipedia we have not been on good terms) but that is not why I reported him. I really don't care what he does. I just want him to stop messing with those two pages so we can all get back to actual editing that matters. Many editors (although I admit mostly myself) have had to revert him constantly on those two pages and he has been warned by myself and others. He continues and I know he will not stop. He always just waits a few days and then changes the pages again. Anyways, I would appreciate your review. I'm not asking for punishment or justice or w/e (I've learned that those do not have a place here on wikipedia), but only for preventative measures to be taken. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 18:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Blocks aren't punitive, and another admin has handled the report. --slakr^\ talk / 20:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Broadway Dance Center

Why did you delete this page. This is a very famous dance school in NYC. Other schools such as Steps on Broadway, New Dance Group and Dance New Amsterdam are listed on Wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwydance (talk • contribs) 21:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Read the delete reason. --slakr^\ talk / 21:01, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

hello and advice sought

hey there, I received a kind reminder from one of your bots, SineBot, reminding me to sign off on the stuff I write. That led me to your user page and I came to know that you are a member of the counter-vandalism team, and I though perhaps you could help me with a recent edit I made to an article which got reverted on vandalism charges though I would like to think I did not indulge in any such activity with my contribution. I would love for you to help me out by offering advice on where I might have gone wrong since I am a new editor on Wikipedia. The link to the talk page of the article is below;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bank_of_Credit_and_Commerce_International

Thanks Syedshoaib (talk) 17:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Can you pretty please provide diffs? Thanks a million =) --slakr^\ talk / 05:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

tell him to

back off then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.218.166.119 (talk) 19:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

There are excellent ways of remaining civil while letting someone know that they're either not being civil themselves or that they're doing something otherwise not in line with our policies and guidelines. --slakr^\ talk / 05:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Please cancel an edit violating The 3RR

1. Some days ago, an editor made this edit.
2. On 23 February, at 5:15, the same editor has made his first revert.
3. On the same day, at 22:23, the same editor made his second revert.
4. On that very day, at 22:57, the same editor made his third revert.
5. On the same day, at 23:26, the same editor made his fourth revert.

Please cancel his fourth revert - which violates 3RR. No need to warn him, because I'm sure it was not done on purpose! He's an honest person who is absolutely aware to the 3RR and has always obeyed the 3RR. Eliko (talk) 01:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Usually we do not revert violations of the 3RR unless unless they fall under the same provisions as making an edit to a protected page (e.g., vandalism/biographies of living persons violations). --slakr^\ talk / 05:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

... and it just so happens that the page is now protected anyway, so what I stated definitely applies. Please see the protection policy for more information. Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 05:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Question about SineBot not signing something

I don't know if this is a bug, but a message got left on my page that didn't get signed. Is it because someone else edited the page right afterwards? I'm a little confused. Usually SineBot always gets them. Thanks, Enigma ^msg! 16:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

• Note: I checked just to be sure, and the user has not opted out of SineBot's messages. Enigma ^msg! 16:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Also happened here. Must be something with this user in particular. Enigma ^msg! 22:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

and here Enigma ^msg! 21:39, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Also here. :) Enigma ^msg! 02:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

There is no valid reason to delete my article

I made an article about the mixed martial arts academy Universidad da Luta. My sources are credible and it is important because it is about a camp formed by several well known people in the MMA world and is recent. I believe it is good that Wikipedia keeps up with ALL appropriate knowledge of ALL kinds including MMA. I'm not sure why you had a problem with the article but please let me know. I already appealed for the article in the section designated. Also Universidade da Luta is not a club but a mixed martial arts academy as stated in the article. We all have our off days as I'm sure that day was yours.

Thank You,

P.S. I accidentally wrote the article as Universidad da Luta due to a typo. If you could please delete that for me and the general public it would be much appreciated.

TapOut_013 —Preceding unsigned comment added by TapOut 013 (talk • contribs) 20:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sinebot should not sign changes to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old

User signatures are not appropriate on this page, and sinebot should not add them. Can you add this page to its exception list? Thanks, Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 22:18, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

All you gotta do is add a bots tag :P Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 22:21, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I never heard of that tag before. Cool. Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 03:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

simultaneous edit

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:Apostle12_reported_by_User:Ice_Cold_Beer_.28Result:_warned.29

Hi Slakr,

you and I were editing at the same time. I am glad you only gave a warning. A question: can two editors break or avoid the 3RR rule by making 4 identical edits, taking turns, or no? Thanks,  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 23:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, two editors can break the 3RR at the same time on the same page, especially if they're clearly just going back and forth. --slakr^\ talk / 23:38, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sinebot signing my (signed) comments

Hey Slakr, can you figure out why sinebot is signing my (signed) comments? Here is one example: [13]

Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

hehehe

So I think my latest idea is the best yet, check out my user page--Pewwer42  Talk  06:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Up late?

Hai thar nocturnal buddy :-) delldot on a public computer talk 09:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Hehe... dell dot or dell bat? :P --slakr^\ talk / 09:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't be ridiculous. dellbat squeak 09:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I can be as ridiculous as I want— I'm a freakin' vampire bat with sonar and stuff. I can go... batty. I mean, people have sometimes said that I have bats in the belfry. Plus, I could, as a bat, attempt to bat my eyelashes at someone to gain attention.... Bleh, I need sleep. :P --slakr^\ talk / 09:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow, you were batting like 400 with all those bat cliches :-P delldot on a public computer talk 09:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh, and with enough of them I can right off the bat quickly go on a bat then proceed to bat around aimlessly, batting the breeze. --slakr^\ talk / 09:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, you win XD delldot on a public computer talk 09:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

... batted that one out of the park ;) --slakr^\ talk / 09:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Sinebot Malfunction

Posted a comment, signed, of course, which Sinebot then corrects with another signature along with a warning. I have a feeling it might have something to do with me using a redirect in my sig (to shorten the length of it), but this hasn't happened to me before, even with the redirect, so I'm assuming it's a glitch. Thanks in advance. --TBC!?! 11:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Your actual username is Tree Biting Conspiracy, so when it sees TBC, it thinks you're signing as someone else. --slakr^\ talk / 20:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Re-block

Can you block this twit again? Seems to be up to his old tricks. ~ Alcmaeonid (talk) 17:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Clarify for me?

Just curious about removing the Speedy request from Toni Graphia per this edit. You didn't explain why you deleted the request, and the article clearly falls within db-bio, since it in no way asserts notability. Clarify for me? Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I was going on prolificness and significant roles per WP:BIO. It didn't explicitly state "he has lots of contributions to television," but executive producer on an award-winning series (Battlestar Galactica) seems like enough of an implicit assertion of notability to survive CSD. Whether it survives AfD is another thing. :P Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 22:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Zsero

Hi. I wanted to let you know that I have removed the block on Zsero (talk · contribs) based on your saying on AN that you don't care either way. I really think that ending the block during waking hours has a huge upside and I will keep an eye on his edits until I go to bed to make sure that the issue doesn't flare back up. Thanks. --B (talk) 04:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Block of 208.54.95.64

Slackr, I appreciate you blocking 208.54.95.64 for 55 h as an abusive Matt Sanchez sock puppet for this and this. You may not be aware that Matt's previous IPs used for abusing editors have been blocked for a month, the first by John Vandenberg amd the second by Edgar181, As such, you might want to consider extending the block. Also, I think you are supposed to record the block here. Best, Jay*Jay (talk) 07:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Technically that IP looks like either a t-mobile hotspot or an IP assigned to WAP users. Either way, I'll just block it for that long for now, and if it comes back we can always block longer. Cheers :) --slakr^\ talk / 07:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Colleenthegreat

Hey Slakr! I see that you thanked the above user for placing a vandalism warning. I suspect that this user (Colleenthegreat) is in fact a disruptive user, verging on vandalism. When you have time, please take a look at her contributions - she hasn't been around long, so look at her last 500 contributions. You will see that virtually all edits she has made to articles were just silly comments which were in most cases immediately reverted. Her vandalism warnings to anonymous users is itself silly - we all know thousands of non-registered users screw around with pages every day. Many even self-revert! Most are caught quickly ... but I know of no seasoned admin who then leaves a vandalism warning. Why? An anonymous user only has an IP address and for all we know, two hours later or the next day a different person may make good edits from the same address. Or this non-registered vandal is doing this once and will never come back. In the examples I see of Colleenthegreat's "warnings," the only effect she had was to create a talk page for an IP address, in many cases an IP addressed used only once. I will provide just two more examples of nonsense (even disruptive) edits: [14] and [15]. Now, if this were someone's first edit to Wikipedia, Andrew c's response (ro read our NPOV and NOR and V policies) would have made sense. But this is someone who has made hundreds of edits and has even rebuked others for vandalism! In any event, the second disruptive edit came after Andrew c's suggestion that she comply with policy.

You were generous to her in thanking her for spotting vandalism. In fact, I think her account exists only to make disruptive edits. Could you go over her contributions and provide another opinion? Slrubenstein | Talk 11:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

It was a templated message that I dropped without really investigating anything. It's basically saying, "zOMGWTFBBQ REJECTED!!!!!!!!" in a nice way. See also: {{uw-notaiv}} and {{uw-aiv}}. I basically just wanted to get the user to stop posting to AIV stuff that wasn't vandalism/whatever, and I didn't want to expunge brain cells to investigate the issue further (due to, if I recall correctly, a flurry of crap to do at aiv at the time, hehe). Cheers. :) --slakr^\ talk / 11:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey Slakr, I think you misunderstand me. I am in no way questioning or criticizing anything you did. I want to know if it is reasonable to ban this user, or designate him/her as a vandal at AN. The only case would be a consistent pattern across the range of her contributions, and I was hoping that, after looking at a wider sample of her contributions, you would tell me whether I am being fair or not. I know you don't want to expunge too many brain cells on this, but I think she is getting away with a lot of crap ...Slrubenstein | Talk 12:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Spelling of "Tuli Kupferberg.:

Hi Kurt,

I'm glad you finally stopped changing my edit of the spelling of Tuli's name. You made me work hard to add that little bit of knowledge.  I wonder why you didn't check your Fugs CDs,LPs or do a Google Search before you acted. When his name appeared in red instead of blue you should have realized it wasn't linking to a page and something was wrong. Well, we all make mistakes,and we learn from them if we are wise.

Yrs, Thelma (Lightning49)

Replied on your talk page. --slakr^\ talk / 17:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

IronAngelAlice 3RR violation

I'm sorry, Slakr, I was apparently unclear in my description of IronAngelAlice's 3RR violation.

Please see: [16]

Regards, NCdave (talk) 19:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I have prepared a revised entry for Richard Mohr, RCA Recording Producer and would like to submit it. You are listed as having removed my previous entry with the reason being “Blatant Copyright Infringement.” Are you referring to the Copyright for www.richardmohr.com  ? I am the author of that web site and hold the copyright. Richard Mohr was the American counterpart of Decca Records, JOHN CULSHAW, (who is already correctly listed in Wikipedia) and he most definitely deserves inclusion.(His 1975 Grammy Award is on Wikipedia). I am a lifelong friend of the late Mr. Mohr and heir to his estate. I would be very grateful for your comments. Thank you for your reconsideration. Peter Bonelli pfbonelli@aol.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peteratwik (talk • contribs) 21:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Richard Mohr, RCA Recording Producer

I have prepared a revised entry for Richard Mohr, RCA Recording Producer and would like to submit it. You are listed as having removed my previous entry with the reason being “Blatant Copyright Infringement.” Are you referring to the Copyright for www.richardmohr.com  ? I am the author of that web site and hold the copyright. Richard Mohr was the American counterpart of Decca Records, JOHN CULSHAW, (who is already correctly listed in Wikipedia) and he most definitely deserves inclusion.(His 1975 Grammy Award is on Wikipedia). I am a lifelong friend of the late Mr. Mohr and heir to his estate. I would be very grateful for your comments. Thank you for your reconsideration. Peter Bonelli pfbonelli@aol.com. Peteratwik (talk) 21:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Check out our copyright policy. Basically you need to be in a position of being able to license the text under the GNU Free Documentation License. --slakr^\ talk / 01:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hybrid Rudiments Page Should Be Re-Posted

The general rudimental drumminnng public defines a hybrid rudiment as any rudiment, thatis a combonation of two or more of the 40 original PAS International Rudiments. There are unlimited possibilities for these Hybrids, and a source can not be attributed for a rudiment that is thought up or innvented by a WIki user. This page allows users to use new combonations of rudiments in their composition, and should be re uploaded because it is a great resource for writers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.182.192.244 (talk) 04:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Xilovesushix

could you watch this user for me? I need to get some sleep(not that I really want to), and If your already sleeping....well guess whoever sees this could do the job. Good night, and see your edits tomorrow--Pewwer42  Talk  08:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

User:217.44.56.101

you put a block on this user a couple days ago which now seems to have ended. the very first edit he did after that was to remove the sockpuppet warnings on User:Tvarkytojas who has been massively disruptive as a POV-pushing category-shifter both in the lithuanian and church denomination areas. when Tvarkytojas began a few days ago, he made hundreds of edits in a very short space of time (often four or five a minute) suggesting to me that his damage is automated. Don't know. I posted something on the administartors incident noteboard, and it hasn't been responded to. in any case, something nasty is afoot. Tb (talk) 15:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

:D

haha nice pic ElisaEXPLOSiONtalk. 17:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Re Richard Mohr - I do not understand what you are talking about. None of the copy in my entry is quoted verbatim from the web site (which site, in any event, I authored). The facts of his career are the same whether I write them or someone else does. I am sure there are thousands of entries in Wikipedia that contain facts that dudplicate facts published in other forms. It is sounding to me that you are just arbtrarily bouncing this entry. Can you tell me what resources I have (at Wikipedia) to question your interpretation of this situation? TYhank you for the courtesy of a reply. P Bonelli. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peteratwik (talk • contribs) 21:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Read the links I provided. When text is verbatim from a website that has a copyright notice on it, we cannot accept it without the copyright holder explicitly stating that they are licensing it with a license compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which essentially means that it needs to be 100% free for any use and that it's okay for others to modify it limitlessly. We don't care if the facts are duplicated— we only care how the facts are duplicated. It's kind of like in opera: nobody cares about copyright if someone sings some random notes; however, they do care if the same string of notes is sung in the same order with the same rhythm as is found in opera 'x'. So, if you're willing to let us use your copyrighted work, please follow the directions at how to let us do so. --slakr^\ talk / 21:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, I noticed you registered another account. Please be sure to familiarize yourself with our sockpuppetry guidelines. --slakr^\ talk / 21:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Richard Mohr

I think I am starting to get the hang of this process. First of all let me quickly say that I submitted a new account because for some reason I was not able to get onto my original account. Please know that I have no intention of abusing the "sockpuppetry" guidlines and will cancel out one of the accounts at once. Secondly I have redone the entry, carefully trying not to repeat the copy from my web site verbatim. There are of course duplicate Names, Dates and Events. So perhaps now I do not have to deal with the GNU Free Doc statement, although that would be easy enough to include on the site if necessary. Can you advise me if I should resubmit the revised entry the usual way or is there another procedure I should follow. Thank you for your patience and I apologize for my blatant unfamiliarity with the correct procedure at Wikipedia. Thanks. Peteratwik (talk) 22:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Sweet! :) You should be able to edit the article normally, since it was only deleted under criteria for speedy deletion guidelines. The main things I'd make sure to watch out for are pretty simple to avoid:

• Be sure to state why he was important (or it might get deleted for not asserting notability,
• Avoid making it sound like an ad (or it might get deleted for being spam, and
• Avoid making it sound like a memorial, but it's not absolutely necessary— just so long as you cover your bases with the first two.

Ideally, also include verifiable, reliable secondary sources to verify the article, including those that are not your site (otherwise someone might assume you're trying to promote your site). Hope that helps, and cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 03:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and I'll leave a welcome note on your talk page in a second to help you find your way around wikipedia should you decide to stay and help out. =) --slakr^\ talk / 03:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Too fast

For me: ""Sjfla;lje998098098 f;lsejkfs (talk • contribs) is already blocked (block log • unblock) . To change the block expiry and/or block reason, you must first unblock the user."" :)Pedro :  Chat  11:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

:P --slakr^\ talk / 11:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Genesis vandal

Yeah, that part doesn't com up until the New Testament, I guess. :D Cheers! – ClockworkSoul 16:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Dallas

I don't understand on your page when you say:

• I'm from hell Dallas, Texas.

What exactly do you mean? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 00:10, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

It's a joke. The <s> tag creates a strikeout similar to what you'd find while editing a paper or proofreading. Essentially, the joke is that I originally typed "hell," but instead of deleting it by backspacing (as once can do on a computer), I instead used the strikeout tag for comedic effect (because, of course, the reader can't see what you have previously backspaced away) in order to indicate that I think that Dallas is hell. Though, it's actually not quite so bad as the worst of hell— it's more like the first circle of hell. ;D --slakr^\ talk / 00:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you...

		The PCHS-NJROTC Abuse Report and Antivandal Barnstar
		For reverting vandalism to Port Charlotte High School!

GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		Here's a barnstar for improving Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! The Helpful One (Review) 22:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:DFW

Did you know that the Dallas-Fort Worth WikiProject is believed to be inactive? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 17:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and I signed up there in case anyone needed admin-y things. I'll try to do more of the non-admin-y things (like help fix up some of the articles/make the portal better) when I remember/have time/feel like it. :P Keep me updated, though. Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 09:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The Dallas-Fort Worth WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 1 • March 9, 2008 • Written by Basketball110
News Project news: Thanks to a big effort by Basketball110 and A little mollusk, the project is up and running again. The project now has 29 members, listed here.	Features Featured Dallas-Fort Worth articles of the week: Dallas, Texas Fort Worth, Texas	Collaboration of the month The feature is coming soon. You will be notified when it is ready.
Archives • Project info

If you would not like to recieve this newsletter, please add your name here.

This newsletter was delivered by Basketball110.

Your Bot Signed An Unsigned Comment With An Unsigned Template Attached

Behold: [17]. :P -WarthogDemon 06:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

It was because you added it in its entirety, so it thought you were trying to be deceptive and sign as someone else, even though you were simply reverting the removal of the edit. --slakr^\ talk / 09:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

peter faulk

but peter faulk IS a legend! why was that deleted?

Cammieshawaaaaaaaaa (talk) 03:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Linux article

Linux and BSD are the SAME THING!!!!! Two names for the same exact thing. and by the way... its nto original resertch if i got the idea from a nother website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpolster2005 (talk • contribs) 03:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

replied on your talk page. --slakr^\ talk / 03:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

linux article

Linux and unix are esentially the same thing. they are both using the same commands, applications are cross compatible etc..... Mach and BSD are also like linux. therefore u can say the mac os is based on linux. i have a mac mini here at home as one of my computers. I have seen the linux command line and have use it. i have been on websites which tell me mac os x is based on linux. linux is a free version of unix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpolster2005 (talk • contribs) 06:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, they don't all have the same commands, and the cross-compatibility is only native to the BSD-side. On FreeBSD, for example, you can run Linux binaries, but on Linux you can't necessarily run FreeBSD binaries. Moreover, Linux is a kernel, whereas FreeBSD is a true operating system. FreeBSD is developed totally differently than, and independent from, Linux. A great example of this is the unified 'ports' collection versus the hodgepodge of rpms scattered across the internet and maintained in various forms by the various distributions of linux, each of which isn't necessarily compatible with each other.

Personal opinion-wise, FreeBSD, for example, kicks Linux's ass, so thank god FreeBSD isn't based on Linux. :P

Of course, that's personal opinion, and we're trying to build an encyclopedia; so, factually-speaking, they are fundamentally different and have very different histories. More importantly, it is factually incorrect to say that FreeBSD is based on Linux or that Mac OS X is based on Linux. The sources are there to prove that your assertion is not true. It's not a matter of opinion— it's a matter of historical record. Just because they look the same and use the similar builds of GNU utilities doesn't mean they are in any way similar in their inner workings. --slakr^\ talk / 07:28, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

SineBot source code

Hello. Is source code of your bot available for download? I was asked to run a signing bot on another project, so it would be quite useful (there is no point in re-inventing the wheel:). Invisible Idiot (talk) 12:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I think you missed my question (excluding my nick it was serious). Invisible Idiot (talk) 12:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, yes, I think this was the issue. Hello :) Actually, I also spotted your bot in action and would be extremely happy to make it possible for it to work on plwiki, which is my home project (as well as the Invisible Idiont's, who's known as Beau on plwiki). Cheers. Wpedzich (talk) 10:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Well... If you didn't want to share it with us you should have written it. The worst kind of refusal is deferment... Invisible Idiot (talk) 15:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

*breaks cheerful and lighthearted demeanor for a moment*

First and foremost, deferment isn't the worst kind of refusal— refusal is. I would have just said "no" if I never intended on releasing it, but as you'll see from my talk page archives, I actually was planning on doing it at some point in the future.

Another idea: you might consider living life from another person's perspective and attempt to understand possible motives for certain actions he or she may take. With enough experience in coding, you quickly realize that very unskilled, unimaginative, and otherwise selfish people are more than happy to run off with your code and claim it as their own work— sometimes for a profit— while you sit there in stupor wondering wtf just happened, all the while every last drop of your generative drive is sucked away, leaving you feeling unmotivated, alone, and betrayed.

As a result, I'm slightly less than eager to wantonly release code on-demand any more— particularly if I've started a project with internal motivation and have put a decent amount of work into it to fix the many bugs/issues people have brought up. Of course, it doesn't really help that there are sites out there that, at the same time as running Mediawiki, indirectly and/or directly blast the very people who help maintain it, either. It also doesn't help that people come along and say that I shouldn't have even written something at all if I'm not going to by-default let everyone and their mother use it for whatever purpose they want and/or proceed to repeatedly post to my talk page in an effort to get their way.

*returns to cheerful and lighthearted demeanor*

So, who's up for some strawberries? --slakr^\ talk / 17:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks for your response. If you don't want to publish it now, no one is going to make you (esp. when your bot is doing great job:-). I will have to start from scratch, however I think your changelog and user complaints on your talk page will be quite useful. Cheers. Invisible Idiot (talk) 21:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

SineBot Mistake?

Hi, Slakr. I noticed at the end of user talk:Tom Butler when I was commenting earlier today that user:Martinphi added a comment [18], then went back and added an extra link within that comment [19], which SineBot then signed [20]. If it is relevant, Martinphi and I were editing that section at the same time, and had an edit conflict, so my posting occurred between his comment and addition. It seems to me that SineBot didn't need to sign this, and the final product (at the end of Martinphi's first post in the section) looks a little odd to me. I just thought you'd like to know in case this indicates a problem with your Bot. Best, Jay*Jay (talk) 13:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Just a quick follow up - is this an actual bug, or have I misinterpreted, or ...? Jay*Jay (talk) 13:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

It's kinda sorta a bug. It's mainly more of a limitation. There was an intermediate edit, so the bot didn't assume the person was editing their own post (i.e., it didn't see a signature within the diff). I'm in the process of writing a parser for wiki headers and text block detecting so as to reduce its dependency on the limited scope of diffs, but I've been fairly busy with several projects :\. --slakr^\ talk / 17:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of The Scientology Handbook

An article that you have been involved in editing, The Scientology Handbook, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Scientology Handbook. Thank you. Coffeepusher (talk) 00:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Lol, I was like "wtf? I never edited that article," and then I realized that I removed a backlink. :P Cheers :P --slakr^\ talk / 01:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that, it was a scientology article, so I was doing my best to follow every letter of the law (notify all contibuters). You where actually one of the few, so I just went down the list without looking at what you actually did.Coffeepusher (talk) 22:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

User: 195.112.35.146

I noticed that you'd recently left a message on this user's talk page relating to vandalism to Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. I just wanted to let you know that this user has also been vandalising the page for Racing game. I've cleaned up the page, but felt taht I should let you know that he doesn't seem to have stopped. Many thanks Gazimoff (talk) 15:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Elz old granny nottttttttttt!

I wonder if you might explain more fully why you regard this an inappropriate user name. It's unusual, certainly, but I don't see what guidlines it breaches. Regards, Mannafredo (talk) 12:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Usually I'll block usernames that make themselves unnecessarily long by repeating letters at the end because they're confusing and are almost always used disruptively (e.g., to vandalize). Either way, I simply softblock so that they're free to create a new account outright and go right along their merry way. :P Cheers :) --slakr^\ talk / 12:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

New section

re: copyrighted material... what copyrighted material was added?

replied on your talk page. --slakr^\ talk / 13:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

re: copyrighted.. but the page contains album art which is also copyrighted by its owner... i am including the lyrics for encyclopedic fair use...

replied. --slakr^\ talk / 14:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

re: copyrighted... ok..so how come the whole of the album art has been included? should only a portion of this be included?

replied --slakr^\ talk / 14:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

i don't now what you talking about.......

Slakr, you told me that i vandalise "List of Bleach Character". You know, I NEVER open that page. And I NEVER share this IP-Address with anyone. I NEVER editing page in Wikipedia (English). So, you must be making a mistake.

Regards,

Stefan Karel Yang —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.94.16.186 (talk) 14:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

As I stated in my FAQ at the top of this page, if you have no idea what I'm talking about, ignore it, as your IP address was likely assigned to someone else before you (back in december). Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 14:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

re: copyrighted...

i dont think u know what ur talking about sorry...if allowed copyrighted image then allowed copyrighted lyrics also. anyway it is really only the music that is copyrighted... no1 goes to the record store to buy a copy of pink floyd lyrics lol they go to buy the music...it would b bad if we had the music on the site but it just the lyrics...there are lots of free sites where can get lyrics from and it eaasy to pirate the songs too so i dont think pink floyd care about lyrics on wikipeda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.217.186 (talk)

I respect your opinion, however, we have policies that I stick to, so if you disagree with the policies, consider bringing it up at the village pump. --slakr^\ talk / 14:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)