User talk:WarthogDemon/Archive/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Caroline Grigsby

When I began reading the article , I too thought it was just a fictional character. But if you read the entire article, it becomes clear that it is really an attack that is disguised as a legitimate article. I quote "Other terms for this person include: bitch, whore, idiot, no-good low lying cheap nothing good for nothing why I oughtta monkey faced two bit two timing no good..., ". Seems like an attack to me. GringoInChile 20:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

On a third re-reading, I do agree with you now. O.o Tricky vandal this person is... -WarthogDemon 20:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, he was trying to be too clever. The novelist's name "Im A. Lye" was a bit of a give away too. --GringoInChile 20:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't even see that. Usually I'm good at spotting names like that... -WarthogDemon 20:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

What is that policy

• IAS 36: Impairment of Assets
• IAS 37: Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets
• IAS 38: Intangible Assets
• IAS 39: Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement
  • The above entries are the same so-called advertising, please also treat them as you wish. --AU DE PEPA 206 01:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I was not positive they all were, so I just put the tag on one. If it's not, feel free to contest it's notability. I'd rather tag one article by accident, rather than 5. -WarthogDemon 01:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

LDB

They don't appear to be copyvios; if he is indeed the writer he says he is on his user page, it's quite likely he is actually writing them. When I first joined this site, I did all my articles on a laptop and then pasted them in reasonably "complete", so I'm not super suspicious. They need wikification, definitely. I googled a bunch of phrases from the articles and didn't find any hits. (Very often large new well-written articles are copyvios, which is probably what made you suspicious.) Hope this helps! Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 05:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Bonkum Articles for Deletion

I noticed that you nominated Bonkum for deletion. I'd just like to let you know that you should notify users who monitor AfD discussion when starting an AfD. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to list pages for deletion gives a good tutorial on how to create an AfD. I usually have to pull up that page when I list AfDs. I also cleaned up the discussion page to fit the format of AfD discussion pages by using the {{subst:afd2}} template. Thanks! --Transfinite 06:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. :) I notified the creator last night. Hope I haven't gotten in over my head here. >_>; -WarthogDemon 00:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Nah, I don't think you're over your head. :-) The procedure for AfDs is a bit convoluted. You asked on my talk page how to close the AfD - an admin will come along after 5 days and close it according to consensus. You don't need to do anything. --Transfinite 02:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

What?

The page Ellyot Dragon was requested! I'm shocked. If you think it was inappropriate, then contact me here. I didn't see anything wrong with it. Could I remove it? Thanks- Chicochango 01:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Think I may have gotten a bit trigger happy. It DID look like a bio of an irrelevant person at first, but I see my error now. My apologies and I'll remove the tag at once. -WarthogDemon 01:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it's ok. Thanks! I was a little tense, so sorry about that! Sincerely, Chicochango 12:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

No prob. I know what that's like myself. Apologies again. :) -WarthogDemon 23:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Spiritpresent

Howdy. I've left a message with the user in question, but a quick heads up. You referred to Doll Graveyard as "your" article. Check out WP:OWN. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 23:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks and understood. -WarthogDemon 23:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

No worries, twas just a heads up. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 00:01, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks WarthogDemon

Wanted to express thanks for the fix-up there in addition to the e-mail sent. Also wanted to let you know that the Talk text regarding the error was removed the first time just 'cause it's not really necessary to have immortalized if you know what I mean. ; )

Cheers again, Warthog. Rock and roll. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JMWZ (talk • contribs) .

No prob and thanks! -WarthogDemon 02:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Your name showing

FYI, the reason your name most likely didn't show up was that you put five tildes. Five tildes does just the time stamp like this - 02:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC). I hope that clarifies that. JoshuaZ 02:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

db tags

Just a minor point (re: Crooky)

{db-empty} or {db-blank} is for articles with little or no content

{db-blanked} says the author has blanked it. It's usually interpreted as surrenduring to the deletion. Fan-1967 04:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

User:202.45.119.68

Thanks for letting me know about User:202.45.119.68. We generally don't ban IP addresses as they are often dynamic and blocking them indefinitely could block people we don't intend to. However this one is pretty bad and I've put a 1 month block in place. If they continue to vandalize after that, I'll be prepared to put a 6 month block in place. Thanks, Gwernol 02:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

No prob. Usually I just give a general warning. I really don't report the unless they're cases of vandalism is as extensive as this one's for reasons like you said. Thanks! -WarthogDemon 03:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Cybercafe.com

If you find an article up for speedy deletion and you want it to go through a full AfD you should remove the speedy deletion tag first, and then list it on AfD. That said, AfDs and speedy deletions cross over each other a lot: people can vote speedy delete on an AfD and articles up for speedy deletion can be sent to AfD like you did. You did nothing wrong. --Daniel Olsen 07:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Odd, I thought I had removed the speedy deletion first. Must've gotten confused. In any even thanks for clearing that up. -WarthogDemon 07:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Virtuti Militari

Poooossibly. The rule of thumb with the frontpage article featured on Main Page is "revert til doomsday." It's something of a mark of pride to keep it open for editing. But we'll see, it's being discussed a bit on IRC at the moment. Thanks for your interest, of course. ;) Luna Santin 07:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, it's the front page article. oO Didn't notice that till just now. ^_^; -WarthogDemon 07:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

School Vandalism

Yeah it might need to banned (I'm not an admin though BTW). Hello32020 19:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah okay, sorry about that. ^^; I'll repost on an admin's page since this is just ridiculous... -WarthogDemon 19:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Deletion tags and reversion

Please do not tagg any further articles for deletion without looking at the criterion for speedy deletion. For you to place {{Db-empty}} and {{db-nonsense}} on Anaheim pepper was wildly inappropiate. The "CSD A1" criterion says "Limited content is not in itself a reason to delete if there is enough context for the article to qualify as a valid stub. This article was properly formatted, with a reference and a stub tag, it clearly had context. I will spare you the text of Wikipedia:Patent nonsense but please do read it.

While creating content is marginally more difficult and doesn't rack up the edit count quite so much as tagging pages for deletion, it is what we're here for after all.

152.91.9.144 ^{(00:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC))}

Why speak to me? I was the third person to revert back to the original tags. There were two others before me and the reasons they had were because the creator of the article in question has recently created other nonsense articles. -WarthogDemon 00:50, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Have a look at their talk pages, I have tuned them up as well.

You slapped a tag two tags on an article that they clearly do not apply to, so I'm reminding you to be more careful, just as I did them. Anyone can remove a speedy tag, hence the words "If this page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice" on the tag. For you to replace it with a bald "rv" is also beyond the bounds of normally acceptable behavior, but I'll leave that for another day.

Oh, I've looked at the other articles, Ben glotzer is not "nonsense" although it does not appear to pass the biographical articles inclusion guideline.

152.91.9.144^{(00:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC))}

Yeah, I found their talk pages shortly thereafter. It was hard to tell if Ben glotzer was a bio or not. It seems to be a coin toss because he kept changing from first and 3rd person. As for "rv" (I thought it stood for "reverting vandalism;" not just "reverting), I mistakenly thought you were adding more nonsense to the article in question. I'll try to remember to write it out instead of abbreviate. And since you weren't I apologize for that and the messup. -WarthogDemon 01:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:AIV

Hello again. Haven't seen you in awhile. Just wanted to drop you a note to see if you were aware of WP:AIV to report vandals who won't stop. I noticed you have been dealing with Oakzabc (talk · contribs) (I already reported him), but reported him directly to an admin's Talk page. If you report vandals to WP:AIV, then any admin monitoring the page can block the vandal. Personally, I use WP:ARV to automatically report vandals to WP:AIV. -- Gogo Dodo 05:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Re your message: You're welcome. =) By the way, the user got indefinitely blocked, his attack article got deleted, and I tagged his attack image. -- Gogo Dodo 05:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Reminder

When using certain template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Glen 05:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I've been trying to remember that, thanks. ^^; I also check my history at times and subst tags I've forgotten. Thanks again! -WarthogDemon 05:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Bartells

I created a new article on Bartell Drugs and I think its fine. You can erase the old message. I will keep adding to it over time. hope its right this time. -—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Publichall (talk • contribs) .

Burger reversion

Haha, sorry about that. I misread the vandal tool and clicked rollback before I could stop it. I reverted it back to your edit myself. Haha, sorry again. [Iridescence]  talk • contrib 19:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

What's a roll back? oO? And no prob. No harm done. ^_^ -WarthogDemon 19:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Userbox migration?

Hello! I saw your message on User talk:Pogogunner, and I couldn't resist the urge to help. You didn't type anything wrong; the userbox migration is an effort to move userboxes in the template namespace to the user namespace. This is because pages that are only meant to transcluded on userpages. I hope this helps! --The Great Llama ^talk 22:15, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, cool. Thanks for the info! :) -WarthogDemon 22:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

huh

What is the deal, this page is legitimate, what is your problem. The Falconer forumla was created by Douglas Falconer to derive estimates of genetic heritability based on phenotypic correlations. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Knowledgeisfree (talk • contribs) .

Feel free to put the a {{hangon}} template up and show it's notability. The problem was mostly you were not going though the instructions listed in the template I put up on the page. (I've made that mistake myself though, so I'm not saying you're dumb.) Once notability is verified by you and other users, someone'll remove the tag. -WarthogDemon 00:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandal count

10 is nothing! User:Merope is planning a party when she gets to 50! :-) -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 00:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Does hers go up as fast as mine is now? It's increased by 6 this evening. Oo -WarthogDemon 01:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

That seems very considerate for the vandal to bump up the vandal count himself...saves you the trouble. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 02:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Falconer formula

I took a look at the article and while I think it needs a lot of work, it seems to be legitimate. I have removed the speedy tag from the article and added some other tags as it does need improvement. I've also warned the creator for the personal attack he made against you on the article's talk page. (S)he has also been vandalizing other articles and received a warning on their talk page for that. Good luck, Gwernol 00:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. ^_^ -WarthogDemon 01:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

WikiSmile

–Mysid☎ has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

=)

...right back at you. =) -- Gogo Dodo 01:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

A Descriptive Header

[1]
You're more than welcome to. It makes things easier for us. -- Steel 01:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Will do and done! -WarthogDemon 01:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Can You Relax?

can you relax my man - i am typing as fast as i can Jacquese 01:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Darth Vader vandalism

Just noticed the little thing going on there- if you look at the history, you'll see that he actually did revert some vandalism- he just missed a lot. Some IP anon user actually did the vandalism. Cheers --DarthBinky 02:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Can you show me where? I'm confused to where he reverted to or how the messup happened, and I'd rather not repeat my mistake. -WarthogDemon 02:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

This is the version that Tercero did here: [[2]]

This [[3]] is the version previous to him. Noticed the paragraph about Empire Strikes Back.

Like I said, he missed a lot- but Tercero wasn't the vandal. Hope that helps clear things up. --DarthBinky 02:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah okay. Thanks for clearing that up and I've just apologized to him for the false accusation. -WarthogDemon 02:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I saw. All's well that ends well. If you want to know more about how to look up stuff on the history page, just drop me a line. I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I remember being confused about it for a while...

Onward and upward. :) --DarthBinky 02:41, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Kikia

Yeah, I checked the image file [4] and realized I've seen a version of this prank somewhere before. Gah. Dina 20:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I've seen these sort of pranks though I'm not sure this thing. o.O -WarthogDemon 21:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		To WarthogDemon for his tireless reverting of vandalism. –- kungming·2 | (Talk·Contact) 00:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Haha... It's perfectly okay to have more than one of the same kind of barnstar! –- kungming·2 | ^{(Talk·Contact)} 02:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

O.o Fastest Internet reply ever! Lol, thanks. Just wanted to be sure. ^_^; Thank you again for the barnstar. :) -WarthogDemon 02:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

User Talk Page Templates

"Maybe I suddenly can't read. I'm not sure. Has anything happened to the template messages where you warn users not to blank warnings on their talk page? It suddenly does not seem to work and I can't find it anywhere... Am I going crazy? o.o;;; I'm asking since, a user is blanking warnings on his talk page: User:Dark glaive -WarthogDemon 04:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)"

I am as surprised as you are by this. Hell's going to start freezing over soon over this! --  Netsnipe  ►  04:57, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Lovely. As far as I can tell everyone left and right and over and under are taking advantage of this! -WarthogDemon 04:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't get too concerned about someone removing old warnings from their talk page. It means they've read it and if they keep on ignoring them, just report them to WP:AIV or WP:ANI and we'll take care of the rest. --  Netsnipe  ►  05:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Very well. Should I stop trying to revert then? My only concern here is the fact that it'll be hard to tell (without looking at history) how far a vandal has gone, and I don't want to accidentaly give a test4 warning to a newcomer... -WarthogDemon 05:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

If I may chime in here, yes, you should definitely stop trying to revert them, since under the current policy (absent a consensus on the removals-of-warnings issue) your reverts fall under 3RR, and in the opinion of many admins may even constitute harassment. Moreover, in the present case, the original "offense" (Dark glaive's edit [5]) wasn't even vandalism by any stretch of the mind; the "warning" was bogus anyway. HTH, Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah okay. Sorry for the confusion. I wasn't even fully aware of all this. I'll stop reverting talk pages starting now. Thanks! -WarthogDemon 05:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the asst.

Thanks for reverting my talk page. Actually though, I had blanked the page myself at an earlier date because it was all outdated comments. So the first edit was fine (removing the personal attack). Thanks again. :) --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 05:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah my bad. ^^; Well you're welcome. :) -WarthogDemon 05:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)