User talk:WJBscribe/Archive 18
Need your assistanceHello WJBscribe. Normally I would go to User:Daniel for this kind of help but since he is on hiatus, and he left you on his list of "helpful ones", I have come to you for help. I do not know if you are familiar with permanently banned User:SEGA? He (and his cast of a thousand socks) was given a community heave-ho quite some time ago. He still filters through with a user account every now and then. His edit habits are very repetative and I believe I have spotted another one. SoonOrSoon (talk · contribs) is (I am almost 100% sure) SEGA under a new name. Like I said, I usually get Daniels help as he knows SEGA well and has assisted me in keeping Wikipedia as "SEGA-free" as possible. If you have some extra time could you investigate my concerns (whether they be right or wrong) Thank you and have a nice day! 156.34.215.138 (talk) 01:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Dennis Oliver articleHello WJBscribe. I really need your assistance. I understand that the article about Dennis Oliver created back in January 2008 was deleted because it was lacking references, which is a reasonable cause. In February 2008 the article was posted again , very well improved with sufficient notable and verifiable references to reliable sources like newspapers proving every single statement noted in the article. The second improved version has also been nominated by editors like "gromlakh" as a good article, and it has been rated as star class and protected by the project. Last April an editor named User:Thiste who is coincidentially involved in the same field as Dennis Oliver ( Fashion), began critizicing the article about Dennis notability. In less than 3 days the article has been unilateral deleted, solely by the admin named User:Pigman As showing in the history of the article, the admin named User:Thatcher immediately restored the article after its revision, clearly stating that the reason why Pigman deleted the article was unjustifiable. But, against after the admin Tatcher restoration, Pigman returned and placed the deletion tag on the head of the article. Pigman is also stating that the links to Dennis Oliver are only showing his name and there are very little comments about him. I am spanish and italian, and after reading all the links to spanish newspapers on Dennis article I can see that there are very good reports about him as an actor an as a assitant director, also in most of the articles is a picture of Dennis!, which clearly shows his acting notability. Furthermore, not every actor is lucky enough to be famous as a Sean Penn or Tom Cruise, but that does not mean that cannot have an article in wikipedia, right?... Wikipedia is not a printed book running out of space that needs to be purged....and Dennis has a reputable career as an actor with important roles on theatrical pieces. In Dennis article every single line is backed up with a link to an external site to prove it, including Dennis website and his listing in the actors database (Imbd). To prove the opposite to Pigman statement who probably does not understand Spanish, I am translating the text of one of the newspapers linked to his article that reads the following and which also includes a huge picture about him: Congratulations to Dennis Oliveras He study acting with Alba Olmos and Gloria Zelaya in a Puerto Rican theater rolling under the direction of Hector Luis Rivera (TEB Theatre) took part in the drama "Amantina or the Story of a desamor." Then, with the same company in the farce "Flemish Twist". Finally "Who is crazy here," under the direction of Otto Montoya. Recently, this boy born in Yauco, Puerto Rico made assistant director Alicia Kaplan in the play "Love and Legacy of Blood" carried scene at the Teatro Natives Queens. The link to the article translated above is: http://dennisoliveraspr.googlepages.com/dennisoliverasdirectorassistant Dear administrator, I do not know to much the way around wikipedia, please help to keep this article and to remove the deletion tag. Thank you very much. The link to Dennis Oliver deletion page is below: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dennis_Oliver again: thank you for your helpjustice all the way (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)justice all the way Need a fast username changeGiven the current situation with Barbara Bauer we need a quick username. A vandal has taken to using her name to vandalize several articles the very first was WP:ANI. The username is of course User:Barbara Bauer. Also it violates WP:Username and it is of a living person and clearly from the accounts edits is not her. The account has been blocked indef as vandal only. Um if you need a username may I suggest User:ANv. Random Choice just based off of first vandalized page. For further WP:ANI#User:Barbara_Bauer Rgoodermote 01:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC) New ProjectMyself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active. If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 04:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC) Hi WJBscribe. I appreciate it was a long time ago but if you look at this page you'll see a user has reuploaded a number of photos which you deleted back in May 2007 to Commons and I was hoping you might be able to assist in deciding whether this is appropriate in relation to the reason you deleted them. See here for the deletion log entries where you state that you've deleted them due to false licenses. I understand all these users were apparently involved in some sockpuppetry case which Shalom is now attempting to question. Was there perhaps evidence that these were simply copied of the net somewhere in order to deceive users into thinking the accounts were used by different people. Thanks for your help. Adambro (talk) 08:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Mediation Help PleaseThis dispute seems to span at least 100 articles and on a couple of user's talk pages is probably where it's probably best discussed, but I don't know how to add a mediation request on them. There are a couple of users (User:Yankees10 and User:Chrisjnelson) who have decided in the interest of uniformity to change every NFL player's article from saying "was drafted by..." to "was originally drafted by..." Their intent was to convey that this is where the player's career began. Often when a player moves to another team their article says they "originally came from such and such team and now are at another team". To make all the articles consistent they decided to make every single article say "originally" in them, even the ones who haven't moved to another team. Since doing this they've gotten their articles reverted many times. Using the word originally implies they have been drafted more than once, when in fact they have not. Or it may imply they've moved on to another team, where in fact many of them have not. Several users feel putting "originally" into an article where it doesn't make sense is wrong, others have pointed out that it's bad grammar. They've gotten into editing wars over it, which is not uncommon for these two users. Chrisjnelson has been blocked 17 times for edit warring over the last year and Yankees10 was just blocked last week. There has been discussions on both of their user pages about it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yankees10#Originally_drafted and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chrisjnelson#Originally. At first I thought this was kind of a dumb argument, but it has potential to spiral out of control (they've put so much work into changing all the articles that at this point they wouldn't admit they were wrong even if they knew they are) so it would be nice to get some more points of view or have a ruling on it. 67.137.0.28 (talk) 19:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello Will, you might be interested in above RFA.--NAHID 17:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Peter DamianHi :-) When you get a chance, could you send your comments and evidence to the ArbCom mailing list (or me) related to Peter Damian situation. Thanks, FloNight♥♥♥ 15:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Initial forays into CHUOkay, thanks for your notes, both understood and I'll act on them in future. And please don't hesitate to use the trout on me should I foul up.... The Rambling Man (talk) 12:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
MediationBot doesn't seem to be clearing processed requests from the pending-requests holding cell. The two requests currently there should have been moved a while ago: Kolo, I rejected a few days ago (curiously, it's also been added to the rejected cases list, as the link, rather than transclusion); the other, has been rejected, and since deleted. I would empty the pending page myself, but I understand editing that page breaks it. Any ideas? Anthøny 23:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
An invitation to the NotTheWikipediaWeeklyGreetings! You have expressed an interest in joining in with the next NotTheWikipediaWeekly episode. We now have a confirmed date and time: the episode will take place at Friday, 9 May 2008, at 00.30 (UTC). For that episode in various local times, see here. If you'd like to attend, please "enroll" at Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly#Confirmed participants. Please also feel free to browse the suggested topics for this epsiode. We look forward to seeing you on Friday at 00.30! All the best, Anthøny 22:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC) Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC) London Meetup Sunday 11th MaySee you tomorrow then! (Wikipedia:Meetup/London 9) -- Harry Wood (talk) 15:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC) RenameWould you please rename per our previous discussion: Setanta747 → Setanta747 (locked). The user should be grabbing the username Setanta747 shortly after this is done. If there is some way to register it for them after the rename is done, that would be nice too... I heard something about a new usergroup for creating usernames on enwiki? I'll leave that for you to do or not as you see fit. Thanks again. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:04, 15 May 2008 (UTC) Crat noticeboard headerI'm curious why you set the z-index in this edit. As it turns out, doing that makes it impossible for me to click to edit the page, using the simple skin. The invisible div containing the shortcut box sits over top of the edit links on the left side of the screen and blocks my mouse clicks. — Carl (CBM · talk) 18:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Hu12I have been watching several articles in silence for quite a long while now, and although I am not an editor, nor am I exactly sure how to be one, I must say that Hu12's edits are way out of control. He obviously has some special administrative powers, but he is using them to the detriment of Wikipedia. I often use Wiki to research material and was surprised by what seems to be a level of bias applied by Hu12. Everything appears to be subjective. If he does not like a particular edit for any reason, he seems to react quite quickly in reverting the edit, and if the edit is then re-reverted by another editor, he then calls the person a sockpuppet and blocks them. Not fully knowing what a sockpuppet is, I can fairly well guess at it. I cannot understand why admins are not screened a little more carefully. It seems to me that this particular admin has lost the plot, and I am starting to see some really negative stuff about him on other posts (which appear to be vandalism however) and even on his own talk page. I simply ask that you look into all of his contributions and deletions and spam blocks and general history, to determine if indeed this is someone wikipedia wants as an admin. I have even searched Google and found lots of references to his actions, almost all negative. An admin should be acting by the book, and not write their own set of rules or interpret the rules to suit their style of adminship. Please, seriously consider having a word with Hu12 about this, and see if he should be pulling his head in. It doesn't look good for wikipedia, and I really believe he is now starting to write wikipedia the way HE wants it to be written. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.142.211 (talk) 03:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC) OTRS vs. spam-tracking requirementsHi. I saw your exchange with Hu12. I have some concerns about the whole situation and I have added them to your discussion at: I would like your input on my proposed compromise. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 12:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC) BCBotHey, yeah, I acted outside my own comfort zone for sure, although it seemed likely that the decision could be easily reversed if necessary. Live and learn I guess. Thanks for notifying me, and please, do keep on keeping me on the straight and narrow. Best, The Rambling Man (talk) 14:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC) I think you may be missing a word in your comment there. You write "lack of reliable independent sources about the subject, rather than mere passing mentions. Does meet notability standards". I think you mean "does not meet". JoshuaZ (talk) 23:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Question re. USURPHi, Sorry to bug you, but I see you're active and I'd like to get a new wikipedian online if possible! -He registered an account jdzooks -He wants to change name to "Apostropher Royal" -He was originally unable to create that name, because it's too similar to "ApostropherRoyal" - which has never been used at all - is completley empty; no user page, no contribs. -He has just created The Apostropher Royal I advised him to forget that, and go back to his 'real' account (which has a little history, nothing much, but still) - do we still have to do all that stuff about notifying the user, waiting 7 days, etc? Thanks! -- Chzz ► 01:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC) Re: You are now an administrator(copied over from my talk page:) :Many thanks. I am very grateful. I will certainly be reading the manual and moving cautiously. :) --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 10:31, 17 May 2008 (UTC) Re: StardollHey, thanks for letting me know about the close here. I've just cut-and-pasted to recreate the article; it was entirely new, so no worries about GFDL with it. Cheers! Tony Fox (arf!) 18:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC) Mediation Committee
I am open for suggestions on this. Arbcom has proven to be useless in the matter. -- Cat chi? 19:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Membership of MedCom is not within my gift to grant you even were I to think that was a sensible idea. You are of course welcome to apply but should bear in mind that applications opposed by two or more members of the Committee will be unsuccessful. Your sanction makes it rather difficult for you to gain the experience needed to demonstrate sound mediation abilities, though you could consider mediating disputes on other projects where your ArbCom sanctions do not apply should an opportunity arise. I also note that your recent interaction with MedCom members (I am thinking particularly of Daniel, AGK and Ryan Postlethwaite) lead me to suspect you don't exactly have their wholehearted support. I commented on your recent appeal that I thought the sanction could be made more narrow in scope. One avenue you could explore would be to locate a dispute you wanted to mediate that was unconnected to Turkish/Kurdish or "episodes and characters" matters, perhaps by keeping an eye on requests going to MedCab. If you spotted something that interested you, and providing I agreed that the subject matter was sufficiently different from areas where you hold strong opinions, I would be willing to ask ArbCom for you to have a special dispensation to mediate that case. If it went well, that would provide a good footing for suggesting that it is to the project's detriment for you not to be allowed to offer your services as a mediator. WjBscribe 16:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC) Grudge MatchHi you said you have restored the grudge match article and yet it still takes me back to a list of teenage mutant ninja turtle episodes which is not what I need (I need the one on a website). I was wondering if you could put it back to the website.Father Time89 (talk) 02:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC) EDIT: Ok I see what you did, although I was wondering if there was someway I could make a disambiguation page for the term grudge match so that I wouldn't have to manually type it in.Father Time89 (talk) 02:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC) Wow you're pretty damn fast (seriously I was going to do the same thing but you beat me to it), thanks for the edit.Father Time89 (talk) 02:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC) D&D Plant articlesThanks! :) BOZ (talk) 13:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC) Re:Server loadThanks for the updated information. In this scenario, what would you suggest for users having their username changed repeatedly? I just asked a user to think about a second rename on WP:CHU on the server load grounds. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC) Thank you......for the fulfilled usurpation. --Fano (talk) 20:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC) Re. Myanmar to BurmaI truly understand your speechlessness, it is no less speechless than mine earlier today when this all started. Nichalp did not follow up the discussion I was having with him. If he had, this would've continued a calm negotiation with no incidents. However, Nichalp never acknowledged what in my view was a blatant, irresponsible mistake. And in the face of that, plus viewing the opinions of other users who denounced Nichalp's actions, plus having requested advice, I decided to revert his move. The fact that Nichalp is a bureaucrat does not allow him to act unilaterally, trample process, and expect his actions to just sit there. I regret that it had to be me to do it, but I cannot just wait eternally for someone else to do it. Yes, I might have used my admin rights inappropriately in order to revert Nichalp. But, in order to revert a much clearer misuse of tools by another admin, I had little choice. Perhaps this is also the first time I use WP:IAR, in order to revert Nichalp's own application of WP:IAR. But I am sorry that I disappointed you. Shouldn't happen too often. :-) Regards, Húsönd 00:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I concur with Husönd when it comes to the bias of Nichalp, who pretends that "Burma supporters" are more politically motivated than "Myanmar supporters". You do not need to look very far into Nichalp's edit history to realize that he is far from neutral in this discussion.--Amban (talk) 03:39, 20 May 2008 (UTC) I thought that I'd wake up this morning (afternoon) wishing that I didn't have to return to this but I'm actually feeling very tranquil and looking forward to continue. So, replying to your last comment on my talk page:
I hope that none of my words has sounded bitter. I have no anger whatsoever, but as you know things we write will sometimes sound very differently than what they would if spoken instead. I am an extremely calm person by nature and my tone is a bit like the Dalai Lama's (with less charisma). :-) Regards, Húsönd 16:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I just wanted to remark that this episode has reflected embarrassing naivete on your part. To review what's happened, here's the steps that have been laid out for future users to follow:
I don't believe this is compatible with the principle of consensus as we normally regard it, but we can't expect people to engage in time-consuming and complex discussion when unilateralism is demonstrated to be highly effective. I am troubled by the idea that this way of operating would be established as the standard procedure. Christopher Parham (talk) 00:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
TypoI figured it is equally courteous to both do this and inform you of it too. Nice name by the way. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I've been usurped!WJB- My username, Reece, was usurped. I also didn't receive email about the talk request (I have the original mail delivery logs), and I'm not in the habit of checking my talk page. I request that the usurpage be reversed. Thank you. I appreciate your time. Reece (talk) 04:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry that you didn't receive an email relating to this matter. From the archive entry that Daniel linked to, it seems that I checked for whether an email address was enable myself. Special:EmailUser isn't 100% foolproof and I am aware of a couple of past occasions when a user has incorrectly been reported to have an email set. Your account was renamed because another user edited using the same username on other projects. Wikipedia's software developers have begun implementing single user login, meaning that the one person gains the rights to use a given name across all Wikimedia projects. The user who now uses your names was highly active (and an administrator) on another project and so had a clear claim to use of the name, whereas you had made little of your account and it had been inactive for some time. I do not think it appropriate to reverse the rename given that it advances the goal of unified accounts across projects. It would also be unfair to the current user of the account name, who has been active since the rename. I would however be willing to rename you to any username that is not currently in use (i.e. one that is not listed at Special:ListUsers. Again, I apologise for the inconvenience. You may of course seek input from other bureaucrats by posting at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard if unhappy with my reply. WjBscribe 00:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC) BAG concernsPer your concerns over my BAG membership, I have create the following templates User:MBisanz/MESSAGES for use in situations where there may be a perception that I am wearing a certain hat, even if I don't intend it to have that perception. MBisanz talk 05:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC) User:AndreasegdeThis user seems to hold personal grudges. He began attacking me early this month.[1] Told to calm down but continued, calling me a vandal for apparently believing McCartney is dead.[2] I was new to such a long article and misguided by the size tag seen while editing. He and another user corrected me about this two months back. But now Andre is trying to claim the article as seen in the above diffs. He just abuses though I make lots of useful edits. He later called me "very clever, by seeming to be a concerned editor, and does not reply to accusations (not replying in any way at all) but continues to slowly destroy what a lot of people have worked on. It's a clever strategy, albeit very destructive. It's a new form of vandal."[3] I was on vacation when all this happened. User:Betty kerner said that I should be reported here but there are no signs of me trying to damage the article. I was just unaware on how to edit it. This is not only on the Talk but on Paul McCartney too. This was where I expanded a sec using its main article. It was perfectly neutral writing with proper sources[4] But he summarised the sec by an edit summary that I expand on Paul is dead, so I am a vandal.[5] He's also attacked on my talk as "I don't expect a reply from a vandal (who is registered, and gives himself so many awards)".[6] He then tried to provoke another user by calling me "a self-elected vandal, who likes awards, albeit given to himself. What a high-fallutin' dipstick."[7] (About awards, I have actually received all four and can show the diffs; the badges and ribbons are self-awards.) I am now just too intimidated to contact Andreasegde by sending him warning templates. I went to the Icidents noticeboard but the admin there is apparently his friend who points out his achievements! They're worthless if he misbehaves so much. Please block this user or I am leaving Wikipedia out of harassment. I can't tolerate his attacks anymore. Ultra! 16:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC) CHU for Isaac HumlClearly I'm in a realm of uncertainty here - I have no access to the OTRS ticket for this, and right now I'm seeing someone desperate to change a name (to "whatever I like") on behalf of someone else. I'd appreciate both your action and your advice on how to deal with this. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
The discussion at the bureaucrat notice board seems to have stalled. I believe that this is an issue that requires wide input, and imminently. When SUL moves beyond +sysop only accounts, en.wikipedia (as the largest wikipedia) is likely to receive a disproportinate number of requests at WP:CHU/U. Your thoughts on getting some opinions to derive a consensus on usurption in the event of SUL, and indeed the best venue to reinvigorate the debate (I noted previous stalled discussions across WP), are desired! Pedro : Chat 21:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Re: Naming controversyI do believe that this naming controversy needs to be nipped once in for all. Based on the feedback you and the others have given me, please do let me know if you find my proposed solution Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Solutions? suitable to proceed further. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC) Usurpation RequestWJBscribe thank you for taking a look at the request, but with all respect, i believe you forgot to WP:AGF on the case. I have asked during the proccess if someone had any questions or concerns and explained what the intended use of the account is and why i found it useful. I explained that there are a lot of templates/userboxes/scripts stored on userpages but the request was declined only in base of the voting templates (which i added on the userspace after searching and seeing that they were proposed for deletion and removed in the last years, and pointed clearly to the discussion pages to avoid having them recreated in the template space again). I do not see any problem in removing them from userspace too if it is requested, but this does not endorse that there is no legitimate use of that account. In fact, i expected it to be used for other templates/userboxes including those of other users (those that want to add them). I'm sorry that you are unconvinced that this a legitimate use, i've been not very long here -i'm just starting to learn how templates work yet-, and i won't take over templates from other users to illustrate the case. You said that If a template is useful, it belongs in the template namespace, and i agree with you, but a lot of templates / userboxes / scripts are actually stored on userpages and not in the template namespace Wikipedia:WikiProject_Hawaii/Shaka, User:Flaminglawyer/HapValDay!, User:Arknascar44/Love_Cabal/Template, User:UBX, User:js . I have no problem in having that account run by any other user, you can run it yourself if you wish. On the other hand it's possible that i'm wrong and that it's actually not useful at all to have that space, but nobody has given a rationale yet, or explained why templates on the userspace are bad Iunaw 02:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
CommonsI see you haven't logged into Commons since the 19th, so you probably haven't read the message that I left. You can disregard my question because someone answered it, but how do I request an exception to only uploading 24 pix in one hour? I was on a roll last night until I hit that speed bump. APK yada yada 12:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Commons IIHi WJB, I've noticed that several M. Lucas images have been tagged as missing sources [8]. I was unable to readd the info in as it's currently protected. Solinkov (talk) 15:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC) NiceThanks for being on time to close Gwen Gale's RfA. I'm glad I didn't have to play a game of "find a bureaucrat" today. :) Acalamari 23:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Skyelarke / Scott FreeRegarding the name change of Scott Free (talk · contribs), there are some related ArbCom restrictions.[9] There should probably be a note added at the ArbCom page, and possibly Talk:John Buscema, which clarifies the name change. Would you like to do it, or shall I go ahead and add something? --Elonka 01:02, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Successful RfAsHello. I usually see you closing RfAs so I think your a good person to ask this. During your time in closing RfAs as successful or unsuccessful, what is the average percentage of a RfA passing? I have noticed personally that RfAs pass around 70% with a good amount of supporters. I am really curious about this. Comments? -- RyRy5 (talk) 04:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
It's hard to judge on percentages alone. The guiding principle by which I operate is that th community generally expects that those with more than 80% will be successfull and that those without 70% will not be. That said, RfA is not purely a vote and much turn on individual circumstances and strength of argument. Statistically, I believe it has been a very long time since someone has failed an RfA with 75% or more of the votes, though I would be hesitant to conclude too much from this fact. There is a spectrum of opinion amongst the Wikipedia community as to how far bureaucrats should be guided by those expressing a given opinion on the outcome of an RfA. Although most bureaucrats are likely to sit towards the middle of that range, I expect there is a certain degree of variation in our thoughts on this matter. WjBscribe 07:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC) JzG RFAR merged with Cla68-FM-SV casePer the arb vote here the RFAR on User:JzG is now merged with this case and he is a named party. Also see my case disposition notes there. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC) CHUHi. I see you renamed User: P m kocovski to User:PMK1, but in the process created User:PMK1 (renamed). Shouldn't this be deleted? It doesn't seem to serve a purpose. Thanks. BalkanFever 10:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC) Hu12 administrator apparent libel and abuseHello, this is a request to review an apparently libelous and abusive comment made about a living person at the talk page for Mount Hood, done by administrator Hu12. Toward the bottom at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mount_Hood#Climbing_Records--Saffron1x (talk) 15:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC) The issue stems from, as you'll see in the article's history section, my interest in adding a simple climbing record listing for Dan Howitt, with the press article references. Hu12's post: After going through the "google results" (a disturbing education of sorts[10]), there appears to be a long line of aliases for Dan Howitt, posting over various websites and forums promoting himself and besmirching the characters of fellow climbers and related. Appears this is an attempt to use wikipedia to import offsite conflicts and further an adjenda. It has been removed. I'd suggest that Dan Howitt read the following, Wikipedia:Wikipedia is in the real world and Law Of Unintended ConsequencesHu12 My reply: Please remove Hu12's Libel and Vandalism above and please report this user's abuse to Wikipedia administration. Also, Hu12 of the "google results" you searched most are in support of Dan Howitt, with tons of his official summit photos on Rainier, Adams, Hood, Shasta, and listings of his timing officials. You strangely give weight to the abusive chat-site gossip and unsupported libel, and your own post above is of that nature. Chat-sites with this sort of conduct are sad. I'm reporting your libel and abuse to the wiki administration.--Saffron1x (talk) 15:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC) Note Hu12 cites a link above as support for his allegations of Dan Howitt. In reading the chat-site thread, and note it's a mere chat-site and has a lot of personal attacks, gossip, unfounded content, libel, etc, you will, nevertheless, find considerable support for Howitt including climbing record photos, timing officials names, etc. Hu12 emphasizes the allegations about the use of aliases, and this is gossip and unsupported.
A Little Thank Youhey just a quick thanks for sorting out my rename from AceLink to Smiley. Most apreciated Smiley =) (talk) 15:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC) Hi. I sent you an e-mail recently, don't know if you got it or not. Everyking (talk) 17:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Regarding your comment at Wikipedia:Changing_username/Archive45#Isaac_Huml_.E2.86.92_Blocked_vandal_.23.23.23... I think "Someone by that name has requested it, as it appears in Google searches, and they don't want people to think it was them" or "It's a person's name, and they have requested that it be renamed. Since they do not own the account, and it is labelled as a sockpuppet, I don't see what the problem is" are reasonable explanation, no? – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Mediation committeeHi WJB. I am interested in helping out a little more with mediation on Wikipedia. I have informally mediated a few article issues in the past and resolved them amicably, I believe. As there are currently no unassigned mediation requests, I can't take the advice of Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Procedure to "show my stuff", and instead offer the work I did with disputing parties on Talk:Dane Rauschenberg as an example. Is the Mediation Committee looking for volunteers, and if so, do you think I might be suitable? Thanks. Neıl 龱 11:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
John Howard RfM troubleHello, WJBscribe. Once again I'm trying to encourage editors at the John Howard article to come to mediation due to continued edit wars. However, I'm being antagonised by the comments of an editor uninvolved in this particular content dispute, user:Sarah. Here's the link to the RfM talk page where she has been commenting. There are maybe 10 or 15 editors involved in this dispute, most partook in the edit war. But these comments that attempt to paint me and one other editor as the real problem are affecting the neutral atmosphere of the RfM. Editors waiting to get started on an RfM are in the perfect place for anyone who wanted to influence their perceptions of the dispute, but I don't think this sort of activity should be allowed on the RfM pages. Sincere regards, Lester 11:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC) Oh, yeah. I completely forgot about that detail in the software. Thanks for refreshing my memory and I'll keep that in mind in the future. Useight (talk) 14:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC) Username ChangeThis morning you renamed a user and know there are a few more requests. I was wondering if you could attend to them? SimpsonsFan08 talk Sign Here Please and get Award 12:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Usernames with non-Roman lettersWas a time that I opposed usernames that used non-Roman alphabets. I felt that this is an English language Wikipedia and the names should reflect that. However, in light of the global accounts, I now support changes such as Tigermighty → כל יכול. I bring this up only because I recall discussing this issue with you a few months ago, and I wanted you to understand the reasoning behind the change in my opinion on this matter. Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 17:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Good idea. Kingturtle (talk) 18:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC) Changing usernameHi WJBscribe. I have a question regarding the namechange process. If I have my name changed, will all my edits be re-attributed to my new account-name? Does this include the images I uploaded and the pages I moved? Cheers, Face 18:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Usurp Request BrianGilliford/TGSFirst off I'm not sure if this is the right place to respond but I figure its safer than editing the usurp page directly. I'm replying in reponse to your comment on the usurp page regarding my usurp request of the username TGS. It is not me in the german wiki. I actually hadn't realized that person was there until after I submitted the request when I checked into the contribs from other projects. If that has an impact on the request itself I'll understand as I'm not entirely sure how requests involving inter-wiki usernames are dealt with. I apologise again if this isn't the preferred method of replying. I'm at work and wasn't quite sure where to put it. BrianGilliford (talk) 03:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Two ThingsFirst of all, your opinion here would probably be valuable. Secondly, why was this request performed so early? Thanks, seresin ( ¡? ) 07:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
SorryObviously I shouldn't have removed the template. My apologies. Spartaz Humbug! 10:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
HilarityLOL. Al Tally talk 21:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Just curious, was this resolved in any way? :) -- lucasbfr talk 23:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![[8]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:MLucas4.jpg&action=history){kind=link}