Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:49, 14 March 2008

This is my restarted talkpage, please respect wikipedia guidelines and be nice.

CSD on WHAV (AM)

You had incorrectly tagged the article as copyright violation. The text was copied from which is free use, as it mentions GFDL at the bottom of that page. I understand that you did that tagging under good faith, for even I have made such mistakes. However make sure in the future you check the copyright status of the webpage before tagging its wiki article under {{db-copyvio|url=}}. Thank You. Welt 10:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Your Request for Rollback

Per your request on WP:RFR, I have enabled your account with the rollback feature. Please read documentation on the tool, and remember that it is to be used for the removal of vandalism only—it must not be used to aid edit warring.

If you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me at my talk page. Best, AGK (contact) 21:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: "Hiya"

No, I wrote it - it's short and to the point :) thanks for checking though. SMC (talk) 11:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

For examples of what a schoolip would write, have a look at my talk page history's reversions. And if you suspect vandalism in future, check the article (or user page's) history. SMC (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Joshuarooney

Josh, I am sorry to inform you that I have closed your RfA as unlikely to reach consensus: there was an 0:5 ratio against the request at the time of processing. However, don't be downhearted by this: I can assure you that your contributions are both highly welcome and valued—many editors have failed their first request for adminship, only to sail through later and become well-respected administrators.

You may wish to review the Guide to RfA before submitting future nominations, as well as well as here and here, both of which list the more highly-supported RfAs. Additionally, admin coaching is a useful aid for editors interested in becoming an administrator. If I can assist you at all, please do not hesitate to contact me. Kindest regards, AGK (contact) 19:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

No worries, and thanks for getting back to me. regards - Joshuarooney2008 (talk) 10:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject BBC!

Hi, and welcome to the BBC WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of the British Broadcasting Corporation.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Tiddly Tom (talk)

Trailer (film)

Josh, you tagged this page section about MPAA ratings as not having a worldwide view. If you review the discussion page on this article about the phenomenon of U.S. movie trailers, this was already addressed. There is the possibility of discussion of other ratings systems around the world being added, but the historical article about the U.S. movie trailer industry certainly merits a section about U.S. movie trailer ratings, as the entire process of editing trailers is (often mercilessly) ruled and enforced by the Motion Picture Association of America. Bsteph1 (talk) 02:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

My mistake, thanks for letting me know. Joshuarooney2008 (talk) 18:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Gosh

I must say, that was a rather mean thing to write, I am after all only new. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrian Fletcher (talk • contribs) 10:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Huh? If you were refering to the response I gave you on Jimbo Wale's talk page, I don't think that is mean at all, what I do think however, is comments like the one you left on his talk page are not appropriate, this is after all an encyclopedia, not a forum. Joshuarooney2008 (talk) 14:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk page abuse?

I saw that you requested protection of User talk:Oh wiki your so fine your so fine you blow my mind for abusing talk page edit rights. Would you mind sharing some of those edits you consider abusive? — Knowledge Seeker দ 18:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, what I meant was, could you share the “diff” links to the specific edits you consider abusive? Are you referring to the unblock request to which I responded several days ago? — Knowledge Seeker দ 19:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, yes. That edit was inappropriate. However, it was two and a half days ago and he was already blocked for it (a block which was later removed). This is now well “after the fact” and I don’t believe that it is sufficient justification for protection. I’ll wait to see, though, if the protecting administrator can produce a better reason why the page should be protected. — Knowledge Seeker দ 19:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to the block on User:Oh wiki your so fine your so fine you blow my mind? That block was a (somewhat questionable) username block; it was not issued for any wrongdoing. Did you consider simply explaining to him that he should use his new username instead of his old username to reply? And why does it matter if other users were trying to get him to communicate? He is free to communicate if he wishes. If that’s all there is, then I’m going to remove the protection.

On an unrelated note, I notice that on your user page, you state “This user believes that every Wiki edit should have a summary”, yet very few of yours do. Why is that? — Knowledge Seeker দ 19:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Certainly. Though if he makes edits like that, it would probably be better to block him rather than protect the pages he vandalizes. Let me know if you encounter any problems with him. — Knowledge Seeker দ 20:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey man.

I know it's tempting to get the last word in sometimes (been there, done that), but the guy's banned... let's just leave him be. :) Jmlk17 08:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

A bit of an advice

While you doing a good job patroling for vandals and Spammer, maybe you can soften a bit. A little more CIVIL even when they are bad, will go a long way. Also editng a few articles would be great as well. Dealing, with bad faith editors can be tiresome, sometime adding a bit of content can be conducive. Good luck, Igor Berger (talk) 11:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

Blocked: for abusing multiple accounts proven by checkuser (Sacharin and Joshuarooney). Indefinite pending further investigation and considering any explanation or mitigating factors either way (such as previous blocks). Thatcher 14:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Joshuarooney (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=WHAT!? I have never heard such nonsense ever, what proof have you got? |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=WHAT!? I have never heard such nonsense ever, what proof have you got? |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=WHAT!? I have never heard such nonsense ever, what proof have you got? |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Joshuarooney2008 (talk) 15:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

• Only the fact that this series of edits came from the same computer...

• . User talk:TharkunColl . . 11:03 . . Joshuarooney (Talk | contribs | block) (End of story)
• . User talk:TharkunColl . . 10:59 . . Sacharin (Talk | contribs | block) (End of story)
• . User talk:TharkunColl . . 10:58 . . Joshuarooney (Talk | contribs | block) (End of story)
• . User talk:TharkunColl . . 10:57 . . Sacharin (Talk | contribs | block) (End of story)
• . User talk:TharkunColl . . 10:53 . . Joshuarooney (Talk | contribs | block) (End of story)
• . User talk:TharkunColl . . 10:51 . . Sacharin (Talk | contribs | block) (End of story)

...among other evidence. Thatcher 15:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC) Well, well, well, it seems I have been found out then, well, thats not much of an issue, you see, Joshuarooney is but one of many, many accounts that I have/will operate. I am surprised it's taked you so long to figure it out. Joshuarooney2008 (talk) 15:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

• Requests for unblock