Misplaced Pages

User talk:Momo san/1st Archive: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:Momo san Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:44, 23 June 2007 editMomo san (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers18,043 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 19:36, 24 March 2023 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,670,242 editsm Bot: Fixing lint errors, replacing obsolete HTML tags: <font> (45x)Tag: Fixed lint errors 
(148 intermediate revisions by 42 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkarchive}}
== External Links ==
== Barnstar ==
I erased the H!P University link at the ] article because it requires people to register on the site, which is a kind of link you need to avoid according to ]. But on Ikimasshoi's and Hello! Online's case, I still don't know whether we should erase them from the list or not. ] 11:45, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
:Oh, sorry about that. Thank you for the correction anyway. :) ] 10:51, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
== About H!P University ==
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
It's entirely at your discretion to delete the H!P University link. If it's advised by Misplaced Pages that sites requiring registration should be avoided, we won't contest that. However I take this opportunity to clarify that H!P University does not charge a subscription fee, all personal information such as e-mail addresses is not used with spam purposes or newsletters, and is an organization which seeks no lucre.
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | This is for your anti-vandalism work at wikipedia. Keep it up! ] 03:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
|}
Thank You :) ] 03:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
:No problem. You earned it:)--] 05:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
::DO you have a IRC client? There is a good IRC recent changes channel on IRC.--] 22:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


==Thanks==
Thanks for your attention to the matter, ] 18:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your congrats! It's a nice feeling to be asked to do something :). <small><span style="border:1px solid #0078FF;padding:1px;background-color:#EFEFEF;color:#0078FF;">] • ] • ]</span></small> 19:59, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
:There you go - a brief protection should deter them. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0078FF;padding:1px;background-color:#EFEFEF;color:#0078FF;">] • ] • ]</span></small> 22:19, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


Thanks :) ] 22:19, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
== WP:AIV Request ==


==Warning Templates==
{{{icon|] }}}Thank you for making a report {{#if:69.76.220.212|about {{userblock|69.76.220.212}}}} on ]. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Misplaced Pages and ] to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to ] users if they have received a recent final ] (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) ''and'' they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:Edits by 69.76.220.212 do not appear to be vandalism. Controversial edits, perhaps, but not vandalism|Edits by 69.76.220.212 do not appear to be vandalism. Controversial edits, perhaps, but not vandalism|Thank you.}} <!--Template:Uw-AIV--> -- ] ] 04:48, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Hey, you recently left a message on user 204.39.240.3 -http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:204.39.240.3 If you find a vandal, please use a template to warn them. Here is the wiki page for vandalism- http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:VAN . Also, since the user had a final warning, you can report him to http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism . This way they will get blocked for their disruptions. Note- I have already reported that user, he has now a 3 month block. HIt me up on my talk page if you need anything. ]''']''' 15:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


I see what you mean, Thanks for the tip ] 04:50, 19 May 2007 (UTC) I do notice some users say that they have reported the vandal on their talk pages, so I kind of took up doing that sometimes, and yes I am aware of using warn templates when they commit vandalism or another offense. ] 16:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


== 71.64.136.169 ==
== Comprising/ Is Comprised Of ==


Wow, ] a persistent little devil. And finally blocked! Good job reverting those edits. —]] 18:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
You reverted my edit where I changed "is comprised of" into "comprising". These sites all agree with me: and and the list goes on. This issue doesnt warrant a section on US's talk page, but I thought I should give you my reasoning before I change it again. If you'd like, I'll change it to read "federal constitutional republic that comprises 50 states...", but the current form of "comprised of" is not standard English, and as such should be changed. ] <sup> ] • ] </sup> 00:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


== Your Vandal Fighter ==


You are becoming quite a good vandal fighter. You are fast for a new wikipedian and you are accurate. keep it up. Cheers!--] 04:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


Thank you! It's all in a days work. lol ] 04:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
== My user page ==


== Achillest ==
Thanks for the help in cleaning up the evil done to my page. I can now go outside. ] ] 20:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


I've reported him and the other sockpuppet, ] at ANI. Both should hopefully be shut down soon. :) -] 15:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
*just replied to your user talk page, hope you got it ] 20:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
:Don't worry, they pretty much always get indef blocked. But sadly, he never seems to tire of creating new ones. But I've appointed myself official Ron liebman sockpuppet watcher, so as fast as he creates them, I report them and they get blocked. It's a dirty job, but someone's gotta do it. :) -] 15:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


Yeah, it's hard to keep certain people away. ] 15:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
:* An excellent suggestion to an increasing dilemma. Auburnpilot has protected me from the evils of those who wish to destroy me. <-- That was really dramatic. ] ] 22:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
:Welcome to the Ron Liebman Defense Cadre. One of these days, I might send an e-mail to the actual SABR member of that name and tell him that someone is taking his name in vain. That might backfire if it really is him. That's why I haven't done it yet. ] 15:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
::I sent the actual Ron Liebman a note just now, alerting him to this constant vandalism by his impostor. I'll let you know what happens. I am not acquainted with the actual Mr. Liebman, but I might be soon. :) ] 18:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, here's to wondering what he will say. ] 18:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
:I reported that new one to Ebyabe, who has turned it over to an admin for attention. That one guy is bizarre. ] 19:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


He seems to be from New York City as he is operating out of the New York Public Library --> "A vandal operating primarily out of the New York City public library open computer terminals, this vandal has impersonated members of baseball statistics organizations and inserted unsourced and false information into numerous baseball-related articles. Case primarily known as {{user|Ron liebman}} but real name unknown." ] 19:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
== Note about use page warnings ==


::Just remember not to let Ron and his sockpuppets get to you. He's made all sorts of snide comments to me and I just ignore them, considering the source. I refuse to descend to that level, so's I can maintain the moral high-ground, doncha know. I mean, I ''could'' comment on what I think ] are, but that wouldn't be ]. Comprendes-voulez-vouz? :) -] 19:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Users are well within their rights to remove messages from their talk pages. Please don't revert such edits, and certainly don't follow it up with a threat of a block. Thanks. ] <span style="color: #999;">// ] // ] //</span> 19:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


*I had no idea, well now I know. Thanks for the tip ] 19:53, 24 May 2007 (UTC) I understand. It's better to ignore such people anyway and not show how you really feel. ] 19:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
**I haven't looked back in my own contributions but I would bet that I learned about this policy the exact same way you did. Your heart's in the right place and now you know something new. You did alright, Momusufan! :) --] 20:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
***If it makes you feel any better, Momusufan, I don't think it was clarified that it was okay until fairly recently. I know for a while I thought it was against policy, too. ] <span style="color: #999;">// ] // ] //</span> 20:02, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


==Durham== == Sockpuppetry ==
Thanks for reverting that spam, I've reported ] on AIV for persistent spamming. Cheers, ] 00:48, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


Yo. That guy vandalizing the Brian Mcleod page, I made a case about him. See ] if you'd like to help. '''Cheers, ] (]) (])''' 02:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
== Xcv47x ==


:It appears he's already blocked now. ] 02:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
{{{icon|] }}}Thank you for making a report {{#if:Xcv47x|about {{userblock|Xcv47x}}}} on ]. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Misplaced Pages and ] to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to ] users if they have received a recent final ] (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) ''and'' they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}} <!--Template:Uw-AIV--> ] 05:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


::Need some help dealing with possible Roitr Sockpuppet ] who continuously reverts redirects towards redundant and erroneous articles. ] 22:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


== talk page vandal ==


thank you for fixing my talk page from that vandal. ] 14:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
==Japanese Buddhism==
Your edit in the Japan article is a little odd. You do realize that Japan doesn't have much of an interaction with China until after the 8th cent. and even then the interaction for Japan to the outside world is a mix between Korea and China. In the 16th cent. Japan still considered Korea a good source of technology and ideas of the bigger world cause of Korea's proximity to Japan. It seems odd to keep excluding or negating Korea from existence when it comes to Japan's ancient history. I'm going to delete that entire sentence cause we can't seem to agree on whether Korea and China contributed to Japan's buddhism or ONLY China contributed to Japan's buddhism. Or I will add that both Korea and China contributed to Japanese buddhism. Thanks --] 08:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


== ] ==


I noticed that you seem to have drawn the ire of ] with some of your edits. Without attacking him (since it's not what we do around here), you might consider posting your thoughts on his ]. There's already a final decision in progress, but I think any further thoughts you may wish to share would be considered. Cheers --] 11:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


== Team colors ==
==Reverted edit to the ]==
Recently, you a user's changes to the ] which is all well and good. Unfortunately, you labeled that user's changes as vandalism. I think one would be hard-pressed to suggest that changes to the sandbox are vandalism, especially since we typically encourage users to 'have at it', as it were, in the sandbox. In fact, if you check out most series of the vandalism warning templates, the first one or two all tell users to go play in the sandbox. :-) &mdash; ] <small>(] | ])</small> 15:22, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


I received your message after I made the change to Reggie Jackson, so please don't think I was ignoring you. How is the practice for gaining a consensus? With Reggie - if you look at his info box, you will see that he played more years with the A's than the Yankees and put up better stats while winning more World Series titles. I think that is a pretty solid argument for A's colors there - especially since he is already shown with a Yankee cap, which would thus be a good split for both franchises. Also, if you read the article, you will see that Reggie originally intended to wear an A's cap on his Hall of Fame plaque but switched to the Yankees only after the A's fired him from a coaching job in 1991. In Reggie's case, I think the argument is strongest for Oakland. Why shouldn't the consensus for change be from the other direction? Who is to decide the status quo?] 21:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
:the last edit, someone put up a speedy deletion template on the page, but I get what you mean. ] 15:26, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
:Try talking to the person involved with the article, I suppose he can help you. ] 21:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


can you go to ]s and ]s talk page to vote what colors should go to the infobox, thanks--] 23:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)Yankees10
::Yes, that's correct, but I don't really think there's any danger that an admin, seeing that page on the list for speedy deletion, would actually delete the page, do you? At the same time, where is a user who wishes to test that template (a stretch, I know) supposed to go to test it if not the sandbox? In any case, I think that's enough said on this. I just didn't want a newbie to think you were ] when you reverted that edit as vandalism. Cheers! &mdash; ] <small>(] | ])</small> 15:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


== PSP 802.11 == == AIV Report ==
I know they're from different ISPs, but if you look at all their edits, there's a hige similarity between the two. The user could be using a proxy, or could be editing from somewhere else. He also vandalized another editor review. this one was of another user who dealt with 12.207.12.28, the first IP. I'm 99% sure it's the same person. ] <small>]</small> 21:41, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


I guess the admins can figure this whole thing out. ] 21:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi - I've left a further message on the user's talk page, and reverted the latest edit, as it made the article inconsistent (text of article change but still had ref which conflicted with the claim). If further violations of 3RR and WP:CIVIL take place, a brief block of the user may be the only reasonable action. --] 20:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
:fair enough, discussing it is better anyway. and he left a message on your talk page as well. ] 20:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


Yeah. Thanks for the rv, by the way. ] <small>]</small> 21:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
::What I do not understand is why you feel the need to "correct" information that you have zero first hand knowledge of. Believe it or not, often times information in specifications is not always kept up to date.


Thanks for keeping me updated. This is for you. <br> <div style="float:center; border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">]
:: Let me explain to you something about the IEEE 802.11b/g/n protocol. It was designed in such a way that if you have a later version then it is always backwards compatible with the previous protocols and you would never even notice. I admit, from what I can tell Sony has not officially said that the PSP is 802.11g, they just updated the firmware. You might be asking... Why have not more people noticed this? And to answer that I give you my theory... Most people have set up their network connections a long time ago and are not continuously checking their connection rate. Assuming they had an 802.11g WAP, when they updated their firmware, their PSP would be connecting automatically at 802.11g but they would have no idea that it is unless they checked their WAP/routers wireless connections tab. There it would in fact list that the device is now 802.11g.


{{{1|] <small>]</small>}}} has smiled at you! Smiles promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! {{{2|}}} <br /> Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
:: Like I have said before... The only reason why I know it is 802.11g is because I was mad my PSP didn't connect via WPA. When I updated the firmware WPA 2 was then an option. I checked my router/WAP to get the WPA information I needed which is in the same wireless connection tab and I was shocked to see that the PSP that was only connecting at 802.11b was now connecting at 802.11g. Had I not specifically looked at my WAP settings, I would not have seen this nor would I have ever known.
</div><!-- Template:smile --><br>] <small>]</small> 21:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


== Thanks ==
:: This can be verified by anyone with a PSP and later firmware. I did nothing special to my PSP and used only official Sony firmware updates. Do you want wikipedia to be accurate or do you want it consistent with outdated documentation?


Thank you for fixing my block notice. It was the first time I used it and I got an unexpected result. Template fixed now. Best regards, <strong>]]]</strong> 15:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
::] 23:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


No problem. ] 15:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
== Good idea ==


== Articles for Protection ==
Yup, I was just looking over his edit history... --] 03:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
No need, i've already added it. Look under . ]''']''' 18:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
:I will protect his talk page if he blanks it again. --] 03:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
:I have took yours off. ]''']''' 18:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


I didn't realize it until after I added it. Thanks for noticing that. ] 19:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
== Comment ==


== Oops, I missed that edit ==
Hello:) Just to let you know you took someones legit comments off my talk page. Please be more careful next time. Have a nice week and God bless:)--] 00:00, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
<div style="float:center; border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">]


I did not see the edit on your talk page in the contributions for ]. Since it was after final warning, had I seen it, I would have blocked him. As it was, while I was reconsidering, another administrator blocked him indefinitely, and I support the block completely. My apologies for missing what was done to your page. —''']''' (]) 03:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
{{{1|]}}} has smiled at you! Smiles promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! {{{2|}}} <br /> Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
</div><!-- Template:smile -->
::Its okay:) I do not care. I myself make quite a few mistakes. Peace:)--] 00:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


It's not a problem. Least it's taken care of, thanks. ] 03:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
==Thanks==
Thanks for your help reverting those changes on the Baton Rouge TV stations. I appericate your help. Just to let you know, he was blocked by ] for 31 hours for vandalism....probably more for the 3RR. Take Care...] <span style="font-size: 0.8em;"><sup>]:]</sup></span> 02:37, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
:As soon as I wrote that ] came up and revert them again. Might be the same person, I am not sure....but I have reverted those changes. *sigh*...why must they make things difficult? Take Care....] <span style="font-size: 0.8em;"><sup>]:]</sup></span> 02:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


== Re: ] ==
Probably is since he is vandalizing the same articles as the IP address did. ] 02:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
:I asked ] is he would partial protect the pages in question. So, I thank you again for your help. - ] <span style="font-size: 0.8em;"><sup>]:]</sup></span> 02:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
::Just to let you know, he was indef blocked by ] (awesome name). Take Care and Thanks again....] <span style="font-size: 0.8em;"><sup>]:]</sup></span> 02:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


Hey Momusufan, just to remind you, if the edits were not blatant vandalism, do not remove them, that decision will be made by the user who operates and maintains that user talk page and only that user alone. ] <sup> ] | ]|]</sup> 14:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
No Problem :) ] 02:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


== Thanks == == A Tip . . . I Think ==
Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage too! Looks like some dude hates me for whatever reason. ] 07:53, 12 June 2007 (UTC)


It seems that reverting the blanking of someone's talk page isn't acceptable as with ]. I'm really not sure why; some admins have done it yet others say it's not acceptable anymore. And every time I've done it, I've gotten in trouble for it. -] 20:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


Even if it's removed, it's still viewable in the talk page history anyway. ] 20:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
:Yeah, precisely my point. Eh, just thought I'd give a tip. If I'm wrong then just discard my bad advice. I've figured out a solution to the problem: let someone else do it. :P Anyways, happy editing. ^_^ -] 20:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


== Japan == == Morning Musume images ==


Hi there! I noticed you were reverting made by a few users. Note that fair use images of living personalities are considered to be replaceable, and deleted within 7 days of tagged. This is because it should be possible to fetch a free image of the same person. This person who is removing the images from the articles is not doing so in bad faith, but instead following our standards. -- ] 03:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you checked the Talk page, but there's been some active debate there alongside the edits to the actual article. Consensus seems to be building against inclusion of the controversial "great power" statement in the intro. ] 05:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


At the same time at ], he tried to put up a fair use image from another website. ] 03:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
:Excuse me, only a few people have left feedback so far. You cannot get consensus from that - to claim you do is to subvert the whole point of wikipedia. The version I had was consensus because it was up for so long. ] 06:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
::Thats why I reverted it back to your's. ] 14:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


== Re: User talk page protection ==
== Barnstar ==


Thanks for the heads-up, I've protected the page now. ] 15:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | This is for your anti-vandalism work at wikipedia. Keep it up! ] 03:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
|}
Thank You :) ] 03:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
:No problem. You earned it:)--] 05:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
::DO you have a IRC client? There is a good IRC recent changes channel on IRC.--] 22:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


==Thanks== ==Re: July 2007==
Thanks for your congrats! It's a nice feeling to be asked to do something :). <small><span style="border:1px solid #0078FF;padding:1px;background-color:#EFEFEF;color:#0078FF;">] • ] • ]</span></small> 19:59, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
:There you go - a brief protection should deter them. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0078FF;padding:1px;background-color:#EFEFEF;color:#0078FF;">] • ] • ]</span></small> 22:19, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


Well I'm using it as experience...Just as there examples of DDR in schools, I'm using my own. I Don't see the problem.
Thanks :) ] 22:19, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


== Welcome back! ==
==Warning Templates==
Hey, you recently left a message on user 204.39.240.3 -http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:204.39.240.3 If you find a vandal, please use a template to warn them. Here is the wiki page for vandalism- http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:VAN . Also, since the user had a final warning, you can report him to http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism . This way they will get blocked for their disruptions. Note- I have already reported that user, he has now a 3 month block. HIt me up on my talk page if you need anything. <font color="00ff00">]</font>'''<font color="ff0000">]</font> 15:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


I think you're great!
I do notice some users say that they have reported the vandal on their talk pages, so I kind of took up doing that sometimes, and yes I am aware of using warn templates when they commit vandalism or another offense. ] 16:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


==] status==
== 71.64.136.169 ==
The ] project is under consideration to be moved to {{t1|inactive}} and/or {{t1|historical}} status. Another proposal is to ] or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project ] and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at ] and at the ]. Thank you! <small>Delivered on behalf of ] 17:41, 10 August 2007 (UTC)</small>


==]==
Wow, ] a persistent little devil. And finally blocked! Good job reverting those edits. —]] 18:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Can you please provide a reason in ]? It's currently blank. ] <small>and his otters</small> • <sup>(]•])</sup> 00:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


== Re:About ] ==
== Your Vandal Fighter ==


Yeah, I'll help watch his contributions and revert things that seem false and are unsourced. I hope he's blocked longer next time. ☆''']]''' 01:54, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
You are becoming quite a good vandal fighter. You are fast for a new wikipedian and you are accurate. keep it up. Cheers!--] 04:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


== Re: Image on Morning Musume article ==
Thank you! It's all in a days work. lol ] 04:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


Because of previous conflicts on H!P images, I think the Morning Musume and Junjun pictures are better off deleted. I don't really mind there being images and usually I just leave them until someone else comes and deletes them unless there's no copyright information. Disbanded groups are allowed to have images though because of the unlikely possibility of being able to get a free image of them as a group. ☆''']]''' 20:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
== Achillest ==


== Sock puppet case: Miamiboyzinhere ==
I've reported him and the other sockpuppet, ] at ANI. Both should hopefully be shut down soon. :) -] 15:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
We did see that in the talk page for ] ... the case will still go forward, as far as I can tell. Last night, the admins semi-protected all the affected Orlando articles, so that anonymous IPs could not edit them.
:Don't worry, they pretty much always get indef blocked. But sadly, he never seems to tire of creating new ones. But I've appointed myself official Ron liebman sockpuppet watcher, so as fast as he creates them, I report them and they get blocked. It's a dirty job, but someone's gotta do it. :) -] 15:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


For now, we editors should give him a chance to explain his actions and why he thinks we should change consensus that has already been established. His behavior '''after that''' will probably dictate what happens beyond that. Thanks for the heads-up. --] (]) 21:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, it's hard to keep certain people away. ] 15:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
:Welcome to the Ron Liebman Defense Cadre. One of these days, I might send an e-mail to the actual SABR member of that name and tell him that someone is taking his name in vain. That might backfire if it really is him. That's why I haven't done it yet. ] 15:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
::I sent the actual Ron Liebman a note just now, alerting him to this constant vandalism by his impostor. I'll let you know what happens. I am not acquainted with the actual Mr. Liebman, but I might be soon. :) ] 18:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, here's to wondering what he will say. ] 18:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
:I reported that new one to Ebyabe, who has turned it over to an admin for attention. That one guy is bizarre. ] 19:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


:I'll alert the other power-users and admins who are following the case. Thanks. --] (]) 21:45, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
He seems to be from New York City as he is operating out of the New York Public Library --> "A vandal operating primarily out of the New York City public library open computer terminals, this vandal has impersonated members of baseball statistics organizations and inserted unsourced and false information into numerous baseball-related articles. Case primarily known as {{user|Ron liebman}} but real name unknown." ] 19:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


::I'm working on sounding the alarm. At worst, back off and wait till the next block, then come back and fix the damage. --] (]) 22:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
::Just remember not to let Ron and his sockpuppets get to you. He's made all sorts of snide comments to me and I just ignore them, considering the source. I refuse to descend to that level, so's I can maintain the moral high-ground, doncha know. I mean, I ''could'' comment on what I think ] are, but that wouldn't be ]. Comprendes-voulez-vouz? :) -] 19:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


I understand. It's better to ignore such people anyway and not show how you really feel. ] 19:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC) :He's blocked for 2 weeks thanks to my AIV report but is 2 weeks good enough? ] (]) 22:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


::Thanks for the report. Honestly, there's not much we can do except try to rise above the nonsense. Now that he's disabled for another couple of weeks, go ahead and clean up whatever you want to clean up, both in your talk page and in the articles you follow. The pattern of behavior will be noted, as admins do not like it when people blank pages to remove warnings. --] (]) 22:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
== Sockpuppetry ==


== ] ==
Yo. That guy vandalizing the Brian Mcleod page, I made a case about him. See ] if you'd like to help. '''Cheers, ] (]) (])''' 02:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


Please be careful and don't remove text from that users talk page (like you did ) and remember, he's allowed to remove what he wants from his page, just like you are entitled to do so on your talk page. -] (]) 22:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
:It appears he's already blocked now. ] 02:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
:He's not vandalising it, he's asking to be unblocked. The page does not, therefore, merit protection. <sub>]</sub><sup>]/]</sup> 22:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. ] (]) 22:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

:No problem. - ] (]) 22:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

::FYI, the IP address, which was apparently a Miamiboyzinhere sockpuppet, just got blocked by another admin for a week. —''']''' (]) 22:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

:Thats good, but of course he may come back on another IP. since that IP tried to wikistalk me, can someone put semi-protection on my talk page? a week or more would be great. ] (]) 22:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
::I see no reason to do it at this point. It was only one IP. - ] (]) 22:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I had put in a request at ] and it got accepted. ] (]) 22:33, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

== Re:] ==

The IP is blocked. &nbsp; '''] ]''' 16:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
:Alright. ] (]) 16:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

== Nice team work! ==

One guy tags them, another supplies evidence, an admin blocks them, and you <nowiki>{{indefblock}}</nowiki> template maintenance them. I love it when it works in harmony. Keep up the good work, ] (]) 00:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


==]==
Can you help with this... Breathtaker is just going to jump IPs again.--] (]) 02:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
:Maybe... he's moved on to 87.122.8.119.--] (]) 02:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I see that. won't be easy until we can get someone to block the range. ] (]) 02:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks.. I;ve got a very pissed off 17 month old girl here who want's some attention from her Daddy.--] (]) 02:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The range has been blocked for a week (). We'll see what happens. - ] (]) 02:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Momusufan.--] (]) 02:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

:No problem :) ] (]) 02:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

== User talk:75.1.23.79 ==

Would you care to explain how do you know, and please ] you posted in this user's page? -- ]<sup>]</sup> 03:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
:If you look at this , you will know that they have contacted the Texas AG's office and the FBI. That should clear it up. ] (]) 03:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
::OK. I read them. I was unfamiliar with the page. Still I don't see what adding your message to the user's talk page will accomplish. I will protect the page as you requested. Thanks. -- ]<sup>]</sup> 03:29, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
:Sorry for the confusion, probably won't accomplish anything but yeah. ] (]) 03:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

== Griffinrc ==

Hi there. I noticed you made on that user's userpage. He's free to do whatever he likes (within reason) on his user page, so may I assume that edit was in error? --] (]) 19:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
:I must add that this is separate from the user's seemingly disruptive activities. --] (]) 19:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
But isn't advertising anything in a userpage againest wikipedia policy? refer to ''Advertising or promotion of a business or non-Misplaced Pages-related organization (such as purely commercial sites or referral links)'' is not allowed on userpages. ] (]) 20:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

==]==
haha, i'm in the process of typing on that! <span style="font-family: papyrus;">]]</span> 05:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
: Do you want to report that IP for 3RR violation, or do you want me to do it? I've never done it, so i'd have to read the directions...have u done it? <span style="font-family: papyrus;">]]</span> 05:40, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I've never reported anyone for a 3RR violation, here is the template to use:

<pre>
<!-- COPY FROM BELOW THIS LINE -->
== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==

*] violation on {{Article|ARTICLE NAME}}. {{3RRV|NAME_OF_USER}}: Time reported: ~~~~~

*Previous version reverted to: <!-- This is MANDATORY. -->

<!--For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert
and/or the actual words (in bold) that are being reverted or reverted to.-->

<!-- In the below section, use diffs and NOT previous versions. See Help:Diff if you do not know what a diff is. -->

*1st revert:
*2nd revert:
*3rd revert:
*4th revert:

*Diff of 3RR warning:

A short explanation of the incident. ~~~~

<!-- COPY FROM ABOVE THIS LINE -->
</pre>

now go to ], New reports go on the bottom of the page. Hope it helps you. ] (]) 05:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

:: LOL, fine I'll do it! I have the page requested to be semi-protected, so I'll see how that goes first <span style="font-family: papyrus;">]]</span> 05:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again :) ] (]) 05:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
: eh, view the talk page again, the IP is calling you out <span style="font-family: papyrus;">]]</span> 05:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
:: I saw that, :) <span style="font-family: papyrus;">]]</span> 06:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

==Epcot article==
Hey there. Thanks for keeping an eye on the sock puppeteer. His information is correct, but the problem we keep having is that he doesn't get consensus. That said, the question of the infoboxes is a valid one. I've added something to this effect on the ] page, if you'd like to join in. --] (]) 22:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
: And he's popping these new IPs up left and right. I can hardly keep up. <small>] &#x007C; ] &#x007C; ]</small> 22:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't get why he's doing this. It's like it will never end. I have to leave so I won't be able to keep track of him. ] (]) 22:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
:Update ... Bandamorales has been hit with an indefinite ban. --] (]) 18:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. ] (]) 18:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

==]==
Hi, thanks for helping to revert the user's removal of the disputed license tags on all those images. He has some strange ideas about copyright for such a long time editor. --] (]) 18:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

== 199.164.68.174 ==

Thanks for catching and fixing my little mistake at ]. -- ] (]) 17:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

:No problem :) ] (]) 17:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)



== No fair ==

Hey, you edit conflicted me...I wanted to report the new sock...no fair ;)<span style="color: #004080; font-family: monospace;">]&middot;(])&middot;(])</span> 19:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

:lol, it's ok. ] (]) 19:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

:: A sock might need cleaning. -- ] (]) 19:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that. But I didn't want to put anything there to tip him off. ] (]) 19:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

==Talk page==
per ] - ''Users may freely remove comments from their own talk pages, though archiving is preferred. They may also remove some content in archiving. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user.'' ] <small>(])</small> 01:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

*Posted at ] ] <small>(])</small> 03:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

== AIV report ==

This looks way too complex for AIV ... I'd suggest taking this one to the ] for a look. ]] 15:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. ] (]) 15:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

==Removing AfD tags==
Hi. Regardless of who nominated an article for deletion, it's not a good idea to remove an AfD tag from an article actively undergoing a deletion debate, as you did . Doing so may prevent interested contributors from knowing that such a debate is ongoing. If you have questions about this, please let me know at my talk page. --] <sup>]</sup> 15:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

== ] edits ==
U said ok but reverted? Y ?<br>
These edits RNT vandalisation.
removed a spam link. edit added info on the upcoming 6th season as well as did page cleanup. I just dont understand. ] (]) 14:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Please talk to an Admin about this, I can't help you. ] (]) 19:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Y not? It was your revert. ] (]) 19:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, other editors reverted your edits too, because they are not sourced and you provided no source. Please talk to ] the one who blocked you and discuss it with him. ] (]) 19:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

==User pages==
The convention is that one does not meddle with another user's user page. Certainly anything that is unacceptable in other namespaces, such as advertising, attack, copyvios, etc. is unacceptable on a user page. But and were both little better than vandalism since there was nothing seriously objectionable in the pages' content. -- ] (] | ]) 01:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
==Nowiki on spam IP's==
Please dont place no wiki, such as . these don't resolve to the corect domain and are used in thanks--] (]) 16:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
:I thought it linked to the actual spam link, Didn't know what it was for. thanks for clearing it up. ] (]) 18:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
::] thanks you.. ;)--] (]) 19:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

== Userpage vandalism ==

Thankyou for reverting the vandalism on my userpage - much appreciated :-) <span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans-serif">]]</span> 15:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

<div style="float:center; border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">]

{{{1|]}}} has smiled at you! Smiles promote ] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! {{{2|}}} <br /> Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
</div><!-- Template:smile -->
<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans-serif">]]</span> 15:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hi Momusufan. I saw your request at ]. I'm not an expert on sockpuppets, but my assumption is that sockpuppets ought to be blocked for as long as the sockmaster, provided there is good evidence. Do you know what the case is for the IP being a sock whose talk page you were proposing for protection? ({{ipvandal|68.89.168.96}}). He does not seem to have edited since December 2007. ] (]) 20:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

To know the case, go here: . To see the list of sockpuppets, go here: . ] (]) 20:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
:I can see the logic of semi-protecting the page. However that would prevent the use of the IP address 68.89.168.96 for editing Misplaced Pages, since he couldn't respond to any messages he might get. And there is no obvious time limit for how long the protection would be needed. So why would we not also give a long-term block to the IP? This becomes strange because we are not supposed to block IPs for a long time, since an unrelated person might happen to connect later and want to edit from that very address. Since this is an apparent paradox, I wonder if somebody has figured out what to do in such cases. ] (]) 04:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Probably someone who knows the case better would understand. I'm not suggesting to block the IP, Only protect it's talk page. But since the IP is dynamic, someone else who comes to wikipedia using that IP may edit on it. ] (]) 04:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

==Inspiron600m==
i am only using another accout besause some idoit got my schools ip address blocked and i only saw one interaction with iloveaustria87 i was a user long before i ever heard of iloveaustria87 at least one year and once again what does sock puppet mean ] (]) 14:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

:And how am I supposed to believe you? It's hard for me to believe a story like that. ] (]) 15:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

i dont know how but i can tell u that my school ip address is 151.199.195.247 i attend henrico county school jhon randolph tucker high school and am in grage 10 you could probally run a back trace of the ip address ] (]) 15:22, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

:Please see the for Inspiron600m, you will see that you edited ] and that you maybe that user. ] (]) 15:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

All i said was hi either greg sidney or tara because those are the 3 possible people that could be behind that account] (]) 15:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

:Then your account would be comprimised and it's gonna end up blocked anyway since you lost control of it. ] (]) 15:28, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

what do you mean that i lost control of it and that it was compromised <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

You let someone else use your account for malicous intent a violation of Misplaced Pages policy. ] (]) 15:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

no i didnt what evidenve made u think that] (]) 15:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

''"All i said was hi either greg sidney or tara because those are the 3 possible people that could be behind that account'', I think that speaks for itself. ] (]) 15:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I meant there are 3 possible people that could be behind the iloveaustria87 account ] (]) 15:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

:I don't think an admin will care, i'm done talking about this. ] (]) 15:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Well one last question what do i need to do to get inspiron600m unblocked is there another and admin that could help me] (]) 15:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Since it's a sockpuppet account, the answer is more than likely "no". ] (]) 15:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

it is not a sock puppet account i cant be a sock puppet if the puppet master account was created after mine] (]) 15:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk to an admin about it, I highly doubt they will believe you. ] (]) 15:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

i thought u were an admin ] (]) 15:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

No, therefore I cannot help you, please talk to Jayron32, the admin that blocked you and discuss it with him, thank you. ] (]) 15:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

well i hope u become one your very good at what u do thanks any way] (]) 15:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:36, 24 March 2023

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Momo san. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
This is for your anti-vandalism work at wikipedia. Keep it up! James, La gloria è a dio 03:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank You :) Momusufan 03:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. You earned it:)--SJP 05:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
DO you have a IRC client? There is a good IRC recent changes channel on IRC.--Sir James Paul 22:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your congrats! It's a nice feeling to be asked to do something :). ck lostsword T C 19:59, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

There you go - a brief protection should deter them. ck lostsword T C 22:19, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :) Momusufan 22:19, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Warning Templates

Hey, you recently left a message on user 204.39.240.3 -http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:204.39.240.3 If you find a vandal, please use a template to warn them. Here is the wiki page for vandalism- http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:VAN . Also, since the user had a final warning, you can report him to http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism . This way they will get blocked for their disruptions. Note- I have already reported that user, he has now a 3 month block. HIt me up on my talk page if you need anything. Warrush 15:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I do notice some users say that they have reported the vandal on their talk pages, so I kind of took up doing that sometimes, and yes I am aware of using warn templates when they commit vandalism or another offense. Momusufan 16:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

71.64.136.169

Wow, somebody's a persistent little devil. And finally blocked! Good job reverting those edits. —Travis 18:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Your Vandal Fighter

You are becoming quite a good vandal fighter. You are fast for a new wikipedian and you are accurate. keep it up. Cheers!--†Sir James Paul† 04:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! It's all in a days work. lol Momusufan 04:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Achillest

I've reported him and the other sockpuppet, Richard neer at ANI. Both should hopefully be shut down soon. :) -Ebyabe 15:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, they pretty much always get indef blocked. But sadly, he never seems to tire of creating new ones. But I've appointed myself official Ron liebman sockpuppet watcher, so as fast as he creates them, I report them and they get blocked. It's a dirty job, but someone's gotta do it. :) -Ebyabe 15:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it's hard to keep certain people away. Momusufan 15:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to the Ron Liebman Defense Cadre. One of these days, I might send an e-mail to the actual SABR member of that name and tell him that someone is taking his name in vain. That might backfire if it really is him. That's why I haven't done it yet. Baseball Bugs 15:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I sent the actual Ron Liebman a note just now, alerting him to this constant vandalism by his impostor. I'll let you know what happens. I am not acquainted with the actual Mr. Liebman, but I might be soon. :) Baseball Bugs 18:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, here's to wondering what he will say. Momusufan 18:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I reported that new one to Ebyabe, who has turned it over to an admin for attention. That one guy is bizarre. Baseball Bugs 19:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

He seems to be from New York City as he is operating out of the New York Public Library --> "A vandal operating primarily out of the New York City public library open computer terminals, this vandal has impersonated members of baseball statistics organizations and inserted unsourced and false information into numerous baseball-related articles. Case primarily known as Ron liebman (talk · contribs) but real name unknown." Momusufan 19:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Just remember not to let Ron and his sockpuppets get to you. He's made all sorts of snide comments to me and I just ignore them, considering the source. I refuse to descend to that level, so's I can maintain the moral high-ground, doncha know. I mean, I could comment on what I think his issues are, but that wouldn't be civil. Comprendes-voulez-vouz? :) -Ebyabe 19:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I understand. It's better to ignore such people anyway and not show how you really feel. Momusufan 19:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Yo. That guy vandalizing the Brian Mcleod page, I made a case about him. See Misplaced Pages: Suspected sock puppets/68.221.255.121‎ if you'd like to help. Cheers, JetLover (Talk) (Sandbox) 02:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

It appears he's already blocked now. Momusufan 02:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Need some help dealing with possible Roitr Sockpuppet Skafult who continuously reverts redirects towards redundant and erroneous articles. Aldis90 22:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

talk page vandal

thank you for fixing my talk page from that vandal. Until(1 == 2) 14:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


Team colors

I received your message after I made the change to Reggie Jackson, so please don't think I was ignoring you. How is the practice for gaining a consensus? With Reggie - if you look at his info box, you will see that he played more years with the A's than the Yankees and put up better stats while winning more World Series titles. I think that is a pretty solid argument for A's colors there - especially since he is already shown with a Yankee cap, which would thus be a good split for both franchises. Also, if you read the article, you will see that Reggie originally intended to wear an A's cap on his Hall of Fame plaque but switched to the Yankees only after the A's fired him from a coaching job in 1991. In Reggie's case, I think the argument is strongest for Oakland. Why shouldn't the consensus for change be from the other direction? Who is to decide the status quo?Pascack 21:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Try talking to the person involved with the article, I suppose he can help you. Momusufan 21:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

can you go to Reggie Jacksons and Jeff Nelson (baseball player)s talk page to vote what colors should go to the infobox, thanks--Yankees10 23:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)Yankees10

AIV Report

I know they're from different ISPs, but if you look at all their edits, there's a hige similarity between the two. The user could be using a proxy, or could be editing from somewhere else. He also vandalized another editor review. this one was of another user who dealt with 12.207.12.28, the first IP. I'm 99% sure it's the same person. mcr616 Speak! 21:41, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess the admins can figure this whole thing out. Momusufan 21:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. Thanks for the rv, by the way. mcr616 Speak! 21:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping me updated. This is for you.

mcr616 Speak! has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.


mcr616 Speak! 21:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for fixing my block notice. It was the first time I used it and I got an unexpected result. Template fixed now. Best regards, Húsönd 15:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Momusufan 15:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Articles for Protection

No need, i've already added it. Look under Saving private ryan. Warrush 18:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I have took yours off. Warrush 18:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't realize it until after I added it. Thanks for noticing that. Momusufan 19:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I missed that edit

I did not see the edit on your talk page in the contributions for User:Dominance. Since it was after final warning, had I seen it, I would have blocked him. As it was, while I was reconsidering, another administrator blocked him indefinitely, and I support the block completely. My apologies for missing what was done to your page. —C.Fred (talk) 03:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

It's not a problem. Least it's taken care of, thanks. Momusufan 03:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: User talk:Onorem

Hey Momusufan, just to remind you, if the edits were not blatant vandalism, do not remove them, that decision will be made by the user who operates and maintains that user talk page and only that user alone. Nat Tang 14:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

A Tip . . . I Think

It seems that reverting the blanking of someone's talk page isn't acceptable as with User talk:GinaGenovese. I'm really not sure why; some admins have done it yet others say it's not acceptable anymore. And every time I've done it, I've gotten in trouble for it. -WarthogDemon 20:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Even if it's removed, it's still viewable in the talk page history anyway. Momusufan 20:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, precisely my point. Eh, just thought I'd give a tip. If I'm wrong then just discard my bad advice. I've figured out a solution to the problem: let someone else do it. :P Anyways, happy editing. ^_^ -WarthogDemon 20:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Morning Musume images

Hi there! I noticed you were reverting some modifications made by a few users. Note that fair use images of living personalities are considered to be replaceable, and deleted within 7 days of tagged. This is because it should be possible to fetch a free image of the same person. This person who is removing the images from the articles is not doing so in bad faith, but instead following our standards. -- ReyBrujo 03:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

At the same time at Morning Musume, he tried to put up a fair use image from another website. Momusufan 03:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: User talk page protection

Thanks for the heads-up, I've protected the page now. Waggers 15:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: July 2007

Well I'm using it as experience...Just as there examples of DDR in schools, I'm using my own. I Don't see the problem.

Welcome back!

I think you're great!

WP:CVU status

The Misplaced Pages:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 17:41, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Tommy destination

Can you please provide a reason in this AfD? It's currently blank. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters00:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:About User:Teddy.Coughlin

Yeah, I'll help watch his contributions and revert things that seem false and are unsourced. I hope he's blocked longer next time. ☆CharlesNguyễn 01:54, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image on Morning Musume article

Because of previous conflicts on H!P images, I think the Morning Musume and Junjun pictures are better off deleted. I don't really mind there being images and usually I just leave them until someone else comes and deletes them unless there's no copyright information. Disbanded groups are allowed to have images though because of the unlikely possibility of being able to get a free image of them as a group. ☆CharlesNguyễn 20:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Sock puppet case: Miamiboyzinhere

We did see that in the talk page for Walt Disney World Resort ... the case will still go forward, as far as I can tell. Last night, the admins semi-protected all the affected Orlando articles, so that anonymous IPs could not edit them.

For now, we editors should give him a chance to explain his actions and why he thinks we should change consensus that has already been established. His behavior after that will probably dictate what happens beyond that. Thanks for the heads-up. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 21:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll alert the other power-users and admins who are following the case. Thanks. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 21:45, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm working on sounding the alarm. At worst, back off and wait till the next block, then come back and fix the damage. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 22:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
He's blocked for 2 weeks thanks to my AIV report but is 2 weeks good enough? Momusufan (talk) 22:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the report. Honestly, there's not much we can do except try to rise above the nonsense. Now that he's disabled for another couple of weeks, go ahead and clean up whatever you want to clean up, both in your talk page and in the articles you follow. The pattern of behavior will be noted, as admins do not like it when people blank pages to remove warnings. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 22:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Miamiboyzinhere

Please be careful and don't remove text from that users talk page (like you did here) and remember, he's allowed to remove what he wants from his page, just like you are entitled to do so on your talk page. -Rjd0060 (talk) 22:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

He's not vandalising it, he's asking to be unblocked. The page does not, therefore, merit protection. GB 22:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. Momusufan (talk) 22:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
FYI, the IP address, which was apparently a Miamiboyzinhere sockpuppet, just got blocked by another admin for a week. —C.Fred (talk) 22:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Thats good, but of course he may come back on another IP. since that IP tried to wikistalk me, can someone put semi-protection on my talk page? a week or more would be great. Momusufan (talk) 22:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I see no reason to do it at this point. It was only one IP. - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I had put in a request at WP:RPP and it got accepted. Momusufan (talk) 22:33, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Viacom

The IP is blocked.   jj137 (talk) 16:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Alright. Momusufan (talk) 16:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice team work!

One guy tags them, another supplies evidence, an admin blocks them, and you {{indefblock}} template maintenance them. I love it when it works in harmony. Keep up the good work, Igor Berger (talk) 00:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection#3 more pages stalked by User:Breathtaker

Can you help with this... Breathtaker is just going to jump IPs again.--Dr who1975 (talk) 02:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe... he's moved on to 87.122.8.119.--Dr who1975 (talk) 02:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I see that. won't be easy until we can get someone to block the range. Momusufan (talk) 02:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.. I;ve got a very pissed off 17 month old girl here who want's some attention from her Daddy.--Dr who1975 (talk) 02:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The range has been blocked for a week (). We'll see what happens. - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Momusufan.--Dr who1975 (talk) 02:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) Momusufan (talk) 02:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:75.1.23.79

Would you care to explain how do you know, and please source this comment you posted in this user's page? -- Alexf 03:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

If you look at this Mmbabies abuse report, you will know that they have contacted the Texas AG's office and the FBI. That should clear it up. Momusufan (talk) 03:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
OK. I read them. I was unfamiliar with the page. Still I don't see what adding your message to the user's talk page will accomplish. I will protect the page as you requested. Thanks. -- Alexf 03:29, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for the confusion, probably won't accomplish anything but yeah. Momusufan (talk) 03:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Griffinrc

Hi there. I noticed this edit you made on that user's userpage. He's free to do whatever he likes (within reason) on his user page, so may I assume that edit was in error? --Rifleman 82 (talk) 19:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I must add that this is separate from the user's seemingly disruptive activities. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 19:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

But isn't advertising anything in a userpage againest wikipedia policy? refer to What I may not have on my userpage Advertising or promotion of a business or non-Misplaced Pages-related organization (such as purely commercial sites or referral links) is not allowed on userpages. Momusufan (talk) 20:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The Debarted

haha, i'm in the process of typing on that! Ctjf83Talk 05:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you want to report that IP for 3RR violation, or do you want me to do it? I've never done it, so i'd have to read the directions...have u done it? Ctjf83Talk 05:40, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I've never reported anyone for a 3RR violation, here is the template to use:

<!-- COPY FROM BELOW THIS LINE -->
== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==
*] violation on {{Article|ARTICLE NAME}}. {{3RRV|NAME_OF_USER}}: Time reported: ~~~~~
*Previous version reverted to:  <!-- This is MANDATORY. -->
<!--For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert
and/or the actual words (in bold) that are being reverted or reverted to.-->
<!-- In the below section, use diffs and NOT previous versions. See Help:Diff if you do not know what a diff is. -->
*1st revert: 
*2nd revert: 
*3rd revert: 
*4th revert: 
*Diff of 3RR warning: 
A short explanation of the incident. ~~~~
<!-- COPY FROM ABOVE THIS LINE -->

now go to Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR, New reports go on the bottom of the page. Hope it helps you. Momusufan (talk) 05:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

LOL, fine I'll do it! I have the page requested to be semi-protected, so I'll see how that goes first Ctjf83Talk 05:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again :) Momusufan (talk) 05:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

eh, view the talk page again, the IP is calling you out Ctjf83Talk 05:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
I saw that, :) Ctjf83Talk 06:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Epcot article

Hey there. Thanks for keeping an eye on the sock puppeteer. His information is correct, but the problem we keep having is that he doesn't get consensus. That said, the question of the infoboxes is a valid one. I've added something to this effect on the talk page, if you'd like to join in. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 22:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

And he's popping these new IPs up left and right. I can hardly keep up. seicer | talk | contribs 22:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't get why he's doing this. It's like it will never end. I have to leave so I won't be able to keep track of him. Momusufan (talk) 22:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Update ... Bandamorales has been hit with an indefinite ban. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 18:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. Momusufan (talk) 18:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

User:MaksKhomenko

Hi, thanks for helping to revert the user's removal of the disputed license tags on all those images. He has some strange ideas about copyright for such a long time editor. --JD554 (talk) 18:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

199.164.68.174

Thanks for catching and fixing my little mistake at User talk:199.164.68.174. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) Momusufan (talk) 17:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


No fair

Hey, you edit conflicted me...I wanted to report the new sock...no fair ;)Legotech·(t)·(c) 19:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

lol, it's ok. Momusufan (talk) 19:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
A sock might need cleaning. -- SEWilco (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that. But I didn't want to put anything there to tip him off. Momusufan (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk page

per Misplaced Pages:Talk page guidelines - Users may freely remove comments from their own talk pages, though archiving is preferred. They may also remove some content in archiving. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. Jeepday (talk) 01:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

AIV report

This looks way too complex for AIV ... I'd suggest taking this one to the sock page for a look. Blueboy96 15:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Momusufan (talk) 15:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Removing AfD tags

Hi. Regardless of who nominated an article for deletion, it's not a good idea to remove an AfD tag from an article actively undergoing a deletion debate, as you did here. Doing so may prevent interested contributors from knowing that such a debate is ongoing. If you have questions about this, please let me know at my talk page. --Moonriddengirl 15:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

College Hill (TV series) edits

U said ok but still reverted? Y ?
These edits RNT vandalisation. This removed a spam link. This edit added info on the upcoming 6th season as well as did page cleanup. I just dont understand. 70.108.92.126 (talk) 14:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Please talk to an Admin about this, I can't help you. Momusufan (talk) 19:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Y not? It was your revert. 70.108.92.126 (talk) 19:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, other editors reverted your edits too, because they are not sourced and you provided no source. Please talk to User talk:C.Fred the one who blocked you and discuss it with him. Momusufan (talk) 19:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

User pages

The convention is that one does not meddle with another user's user page. Certainly anything that is unacceptable in other namespaces, such as advertising, attack, copyvios, etc. is unacceptable on a user page. But this edit and this one were both little better than vandalism since there was nothing seriously objectionable in the pages' content. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 01:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Nowiki on spam IP's

Please dont place no wiki, such as this. these don't resolve to the corect domain and are used in search tracking thanks--Hu12 (talk) 16:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I thought it linked to the actual spam link, Didn't know what it was for. thanks for clearing it up. Momusufan (talk) 18:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam thanks you.. ;)--Hu12 (talk) 19:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Userpage vandalism

Thankyou for reverting the vandalism on my userpage - much appreciated :-) Lradrama 15:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

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

Lradrama 15:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Mmbabies

Hi Momusufan. I saw your request at WP:RPP. I'm not an expert on sockpuppets, but my assumption is that sockpuppets ought to be blocked for as long as the sockmaster, provided there is good evidence. Do you know what the case is for the IP being a sock whose talk page you were proposing for protection? (68.89.168.96 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)). He does not seem to have edited since December 2007. EdJohnston (talk) 20:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

To know the case, go here: Long term abuse/Mmbabies. To see the list of sockpuppets, go here: List of Mmbabies sockpuppets. Momusufan (talk) 20:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I can see the logic of semi-protecting the page. However that would prevent the use of the IP address 68.89.168.96 for editing Misplaced Pages, since he couldn't respond to any messages he might get. And there is no obvious time limit for how long the protection would be needed. So why would we not also give a long-term block to the IP? This becomes strange because we are not supposed to block IPs for a long time, since an unrelated person might happen to connect later and want to edit from that very address. Since this is an apparent paradox, I wonder if somebody has figured out what to do in such cases. EdJohnston (talk) 04:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Probably someone who knows the case better would understand. I'm not suggesting to block the IP, Only protect it's talk page. But since the IP is dynamic, someone else who comes to wikipedia using that IP may edit on it. Momusufan (talk) 04:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Inspiron600m

i am only using another accout besause some idoit got my schools ip address blocked and i only saw one interaction with iloveaustria87 i was a user long before i ever heard of iloveaustria87 at least one year and once again what does sock puppet mean Inspiron6m (talk) 14:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

And how am I supposed to believe you? It's hard for me to believe a story like that. Momusufan (talk) 15:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

i dont know how but i can tell u that my school ip address is 151.199.195.247 i attend henrico county school jhon randolph tucker high school and am in grage 10 you could probally run a back trace of the ip address Inspiron6m (talk) 15:22, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Please see the Contributions for Inspiron600m, you will see that you edited User talk:Iloveaustria87 and that you maybe that user. Momusufan (talk) 15:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

All i said was hi either greg sidney or tara because those are the 3 possible people that could be behind that accountInspiron6m (talk) 15:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Then your account would be comprimised and it's gonna end up blocked anyway since you lost control of it. Momusufan (talk) 15:28, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

what do you mean that i lost control of it and that it was compromised —Preceding unsigned comment added by Insprion6m (talkcontribs)

You let someone else use your account for malicous intent a violation of Misplaced Pages policy. Momusufan (talk) 15:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

no i didnt what evidenve made u think thatInspiron6m (talk) 15:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

"All i said was hi either greg sidney or tara because those are the 3 possible people that could be behind that account, I think that speaks for itself. Momusufan (talk) 15:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I meant there are 3 possible people that could be behind the iloveaustria87 account Inspiron6m (talk) 15:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think an admin will care, i'm done talking about this. Momusufan (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Well one last question what do i need to do to get inspiron600m unblocked is there another and admin that could help meInspiron6m (talk) 15:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Since it's a sockpuppet account, the answer is more than likely "no". Momusufan (talk) 15:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

it is not a sock puppet account i cant be a sock puppet if the puppet master account was created after mineInspiron6m (talk) 15:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk to an admin about it, I highly doubt they will believe you. Momusufan (talk) 15:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

i thought u were an admin Inspiron6m (talk) 15:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

No, therefore I cannot help you, please talk to Jayron32, the admin that blocked you and discuss it with him, thank you. Momusufan (talk) 15:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

well i hope u become one your very good at what u do thanks any wayInspiron6m (talk) 15:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)