| Revision as of 21:19, 12 April 2008 editRyanCross (talk | contribs)Rollbackers20,872 edits Undid revision 205197699 by 76.2.179.86 (talk)← Previous edit |
Revision as of 21:21, 12 April 2008 edit undo76.2.179.86 (talk) ←Replaced content with ' == WHEEE! =='Next edit → |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{administrator}} |
|
|
<div style="align: center; padding: 1em; border: solid 2px MidnightBlue; background-color: LightSlateGray;"> |
|
|
<center><font color="white">'''Please leave new messages at the bottom of the page, or you can ] . <br> I will usually reply to messages left ''here'' on <u>your</u> talk page.'''</font></center></div><br> |
|
|
------------------ |
|
|
<br> |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}} |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 100K |
|
|
|counter = 5 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|
|algo = old(6d) |
|
|
|archive = User talk:Rjd0060/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
<!-- PLEASE ADD NEW MESSAGES TO THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE --> |
|
|
{{Archive box|image=]|<center>] • ] • ]<br>] • ]<!-- • ] --> |
|
|
</center>}} |
|
|
<!-------- DO NOT ADD ANYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE --------> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
⚫ |
== WHEEE! == |
|
== What do you suggest we do to address ]'s tagging? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Calton continues, I randomly pulled user out of Calton's many spam warning contributions over the past day and got this one: ] - the user has never been blocked, let alone indef blocked. Should I start a separate ] thread to address this issue? What are your recommendations? Calton never responded to your request for an explanation.--]<sup>(] <small>•</small> ])</sup> 23:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:''Have you ever left a note on his talk page, asking him why he does it? . . .'' (posted at ]) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Most certainly, you will recall this recent post by me at ] (which we agreed was slightly off topic) : <blockquote> |
|
|
::: Well, no offense ], but I know you commonly tag userpages as spam and then add {{tl|temporary userpage}} to their talk pages. Several admins have addressed this issue with you before, including me, but we apparently have a clear difference of opinion over the proper usage of {{tl|temporary userpage}}. (See ], ], ], ]). If I notice these I review them. Some of these are in fact indef blocked and don't have an indef block tag, so the {{tl|temporary userpage}} tag is valid. Others have never been blocked, let alone indef blocked. If you look at ] you'll probably find that many, if not most, usertalkpages are due to {{tl|temporary userpage}} on the talk page - though I'm not saying they're all there due to Calton - I have no idea. Alternatively, will give a good starting place if you go through the ones tagged as spam in particular (Calton puts the template in the edit summary so this is pretty easy). --]<sup>(] <small>•</small> ])</sup> 23:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
</blockquote> |
|
|
::There are four notices to Calton there, comprising the concerns of five separate admins, the last one is mine. ''When'' Calton replies, it sounds like "Don't complain to me, I just tag them, complain to the admins who are deleting" - that's a paraphrase not a quote. Of course, the complaining parties ''are'' the admins. In at least one case, the third one above, Calton appears to convince the admin that he doesn't understand policy and should be deleting these. There is at least one other notice on his page regarding inappropriate use of CSD against user talk pages too. Calton's attitude seems to be that these pages don't belong here so I won't stop tagging them. I'm a new admin and don't really know the best way to handle this, several very experienced admins seem to have given up already. Problem is, from that AN thread we have evidence that some admins have been just cleaning out the queue and maybe not always noticing whether the user was actually indef blocked (of all the tags that I'm aware of that feed ], {{tl|temporary userpage}} is the only one that is not clearly an indef blocked tag) --]<sup>(] <small>•</small> ])</sup> 23:48, 5 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::So, any thoughts on this?--]<sup>(] <small>•</small> ])</sup> 15:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology == |
|
|
|
|
|
I see ] was deleted, but I was more puzzled to find {{User|Hersfold}} removing all incoming links. Hersfold says that he was acting on your request. To be sure, there is little doubt that FASEB is notable, and I'm therefore not convinced that all the links need to be removed. Could you clarify the situation? ] | ] 00:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: I agree, this was a really unnecessary action. ] is perfectly valid and important article (also indicated by the number of wikilinks). You should not remove redlinks, and redirects simply because an article was deleted due to copyvio issues. The article was recreated immediately with non-copyvio content. Please take your time to check each case individually! Also, please try to remember all deleted redirects and reinstate them. Thanks, ] 02:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::(cross posted) Sorry to the 3 of you for the confusion. Yes, I deleted the article as a complete copyright violation. The links that were removed by Hersfold, was after I had asked him to do it, as my tool wasn't functioning properly. In this specific case, the links did not have to be removed and it may have in fact been best to leave them, to allow for recreation of the article without copyright violations. My apologies for this error, and thanks for bringing it to my attention. - ] (]) 03:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Great, thanks. ] | ] 09:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Lectures == |
|
|
|
|
|
The lecture has started. irc.freenode.net, #wikipedia-en-lectures |
|
|
|
|
|
--] (]) 15:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
| ⚫ |
== Hey == |
|
|
|
|
|
When wikipedia starts blocking racists i wont need to. Hes vandalised my talk page for days already. ] (]) 01:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== DXCJ == |
|
|
|
|
|
Let me know if there are any I missed. The socks all seem to be blocked now. --] | ] 02:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Tighina == |
|
|
|
|
|
I notice you have blocked the page ] from being moved by the request of ]. That user has abused his powers in previously protecting the page. |
|
|
|
|
|
Refer to the Misplaced Pages protection policy at ]: |
|
|
|
|
|
"administrators should avoid favoring one name over another, and protection should not be considered an endorsement of the current name." |
|
|
|
|
|
However Mikkalai has stated that: "This is the official name of the city, according to the evidence presented. Period" in order to justify his actions. |
|
|
|
|
|
There was previously a proposal to move the page, however it ended with no consensus. This definitely doesn't favour either name. I would be interested to hear your reasons for further protecting the page at his request. ] (]) 10:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Look at this == |
|
|
|
|
|
When you thought fake BB articles were no more. → ] it has been tagged. Vandalism I say. Pure hoax. ''']] ]''' 02:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:Thanks. I have no idea where these articles are coming from first BB Kids then BB Canada. At this point if CBS says they are having an CBB edition I wouldn't believe them. ''']] ]''' 03:23, 12 April 2008 (UTC) |
|