Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:49, 4 November 2009

Talkback sink

Please drop all {{talkback}} type messages (aka "I have responded to your message on my own talk page") in this section. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 05:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

@PatPeter and Friendly note regarding talk page messages:

Drappel (talk) 12:28, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Here's your orange bar, sorry for the delay. :)   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 09:45, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks alot!

No worries on the delay.

recent edit of Seven Wonders of the Ancient World article

Kralizec!: my apologies for the recent vandalism of this page, it was done by a younger member of our household and I will ensure it does not happen again.

Swardy (talk) 10:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Orly

In addition, thanks for being "not a jerk" in your response to mine under that deletion review... (don't misunderstand that I think you are usually a jerk - it's just that some other people have some less useful and more unnecessarily harsh response styles :) Luminifer (talk) 23:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Good day,

Could you please send me a copy of my article http://en.wikipedia.org/Mentalium (seems to be deleted). At 5148351@gmail.com.

Thanks in advance, David —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkervali (talk • contribs) 09:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for reverting vandalism to my userpage! Marx01 19:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. I've never actually been vandalized on any of my pages, so this is a very new experience for me! Also the vandalism was very distracting... Again thanks!!!! Marx01 18:47, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)

The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Talk pages?

Thanks for weighing in on topics regarding the actions of an edit-warrior and a heavy-handed administrator.

My (recent past) hands aren't clean regarding Misplaced Pages procedures, but my factual, rhetorical and logical intents have been clear throughout.

The edit war appears over, even if there's a warrior still looking for a fight. As for the administrator, he and I have been e-mailing amicably throughout the weekend to resolve his concerns.

162.6.97.3 (talk) 16:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks all the more now! :)

I coulda done better from the start, i.e. didn't throw the first punch, but then more of a French Resistance type in response than a Gandhi disciple. (All of this now feels like the first days of e-mail years ago, when any poorly written message launched a series of flames.)

If I can be of any assistance to you in the future, don't hesistate to contact me here.

162.6.97.3 (talk) 16:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Ratel warring? vandalizing? bad faith?

User Ratel is trying to archive an active discussion in Aktion T4. This User Ratel is clearly involved in the discussion.

• First attempt to archive the active discussion
• Second attempt to archive the active discussion
• Third attempt to archive the active discussion
• Fourth attemot to archive the active discussion

• First warning
• Second warning

• In the discussion it was asked for a "reliable" (according to Misplaced Pages Policies) source, supporting that Aktion T4 was euthanasia and that any euthanasia is not unlike Aktion T4, because the current article claims the contrary in this section: Aktion_T4#T4_and_euthanasia.
• There are a lot of sources, but at least one "reliable" source was provided in this post:Talk:Action_T4#propaganda_pro_euthanasia_.3D_crime_apology. This source (Alexander Leo, Medical science under dictatorship, New England Journal of Medicine, No.241, pages 39-47) states that Aktion T4 was euthanasia and that any euthanasia is not unlike Aktion T4
• Like the mentioned section of the article, also User:Ratel claims euthanasia has nothing to do with Aktion T4, and he is involved in the mentioned dicussion.
• Therefore: why is he allowed to archive exactly all the discussion including the post providing the demanded source?
• Note that User:Ratel posted his first attempt to autoarchive the discussion some hours after the post providing the demanded source.

comment made by 190.25.102.181 (talk) 17:48, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

User 67.188.47.4 vandalism

You removed this IP address and the reason said they were insufficiently warned. If you look on the talk page, they were warned a total of eight times, 4 times on July 29 which resulted in a temporary ban, since the ban they were warned on August 3, August 6 twice, and August 11. The edits are blatant vandalism mostly. They obviously are not going to stop. If 8 warning arent enough, how many notices are enough? Ejfetters (talk) 09:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		I hereby award you, Kralizec!, the Barnstar of Integrity for your patience and fairness in dealing with unregistered user 67.188.47.4. I respect assertion to follow rules, because I believe they are created for very specific reasons. Thank you for being an Administrator of the English Misplaced Pages. :) Dillard421♂♂ 19:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

Thanks for the offer of activating the rollback function for me. Yes please switch on, I tend to do a number of undos on the many pages I am watching. --Traveler100 (talk) 15:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Inuit18 is sockpuppet

You just blocked User:Inuit18 for 30 hours, he is a sockpuppet of banned User:Šāhzādé (a.k.a User:Draco of Utopia, User:Germany2008, User:Anoshirawan...), just compare his edit summary, behaviour and articles worked on. If you file Check User it will confirm, he is a racist cursing at people of other race and all his edits are racist.--119.73.4.166 (talk) 22:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

SPI

You had mentioned once that you had an interest in helping at WP:SPI. We are rather short-staffed there at the moment. Are you still interested? MBisanz 05:08, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd be happy to train you. I won't be around much and will best be reached via email, but I could help you learn the ropes and all. Do you ever use IRC? MBisanz 05:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I went ahead and added you to the trainee list. Feel free to look around and see how things work. If you use Firefox, you can click the (direct link) to use the IRC functions. Feel free to email me when you are ready to tackle a specific case. MBisanz 05:34, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

94.192.38.247‎

There is a third unblock request on the IP's talk page. I have said for the user to be careful with it, but they ain't listening. Wanna take it or should it be left for someone else? - NeutralHomer • Talk • 05:52, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't know that an admin couldn't do more than one unblock request per user, per block. My apologizes. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 05:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

You may want to comment at WP:AN#IP user repeatedly removing WHOIS template from talk page. Hans Adler 12:19, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

That is because Bushfire is just to do with Australia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.112.226 (talk) 07:33, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Conversion disorder sockpuppet again...

Hi Kralizec!, we were recently corresponding about some trouble with user:alpinist on conversion disorder. He is now using a new sockpuppet called user:RAkanaan which is the name of a psychiatrist at the Maudsley who has contacted me with concerns that his name was being used on wikipedia in this way. Are you able to check / block this account? Many thanks. --PaulWicks (talk) 12:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Diffs, here is the most recent one from user:RAkanaan and from anonymous IP that was identified as an SP . Does that help? Cheers, --PaulWicks (talk) 15:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not so much the issue of it being a sock, more that he is impersonating a psychiatrist with an interest in conversion disorder who is not pleased that his name is being used in this way. Is there other recourse for that? --PaulWicks (talk) 13:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your time. --PaulWicks (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:RPP

I've requested that another administrator have their say on this request, as I feel you were too hasty with your initial judgement and did not read the nomination properly. Thanks, DJ 18:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC).

banned Inuit18 continues disruptive editing

Inuit18 continues with Disruptive editing even though he/she was banned for it less than 3 days ago. If we look at the user's contribution history we can clearly see that the account was created for vandalalism purpose only because we cannot see an constructive edits. Giving warnings is pretty useless because all the user does is remove the warnings. Your assistance will be really appreciated. (Ketabtoon (talk) 22:21, 17 August 2009 (UTC))

you are clearly lying here. All of my edits since my ban had a reason which I wrote for you and other users in the talk pages. except for a mistake I made on the Kabul province article which I removed something that was sourced and I put it back when you wrote your reason on the Talk page my other edits are just and constructive since I have provided sources and reasons for my edits. --Inuit18 (talk) 23:19, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Storm shadow dispute

I've tried reasoning with him he doesn't stop with the speculation he doesn't understand look here User talk:74.196.212.138 he thinks he has a valid reason over what he thinks The Movie Master 1 (talk) 01:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

please move-protect paypal

Will you please move-protect the PayPal page?Btilm (talk) 01:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

re:Our AOL friend

You know, I'll take you up on that offer. Thanks and cheers! -sesuPRIME 03:59, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Cheers and happy editing! -sesuPRIME 04:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Alright, thanks, I'll keep you in mind when something else needs protectin'. Gotta love Huggle! -sesuPRIME 04:12, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Quick Question

It says on the edit notice for WP:AIV that editors can reply to reports where they feel appropriate. Is it okay if I chime in every now and then? Or should I avoid that and just leave it to the admins? Thanks! –túrian 05:36, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! –túrian 06:12, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

revert

Yes, I should have not used rollback. However, if you see what he changed, Devil simply reverted what I had done. He didn't edit it, he reverted my changes to his version. I will not change what I have done here, but I will not use that tool again. If I lose rollback privileges, so be it. Canada Jack (talk) 20:08, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Kent Plantation House

What do you think of my first wikipedia page? Please give me your opinion. Reply here and then put a talkback box on my talk page. Btilm (talk) 18:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

??

What requirements are there to get the rollback feature?  Btilm  21:14, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

rollback

I,  Btilm , promise to use the rollback feature to the best of my abilities, to make Misplaced Pages a better place.

I have another question. Is there a tool or technique that makes giving a user a warning easier than to copy and paste the code from Misplaced Pages:Template messages/User talk namespace and then copy and paste the name of the article?  Btilm  21:37, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Xellas

I'm not sure what to do about him. I have replied to him at my talk page but i'm just not sure what to tell him further. Can you help me out with this? Momo san 00:14, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

SquirtsDream

Hiya. Pls also see User:SquirtsDream, User:SquirtsDream2, and especially User:SquirtsDream2/I love money kids. → ROUX ₪ 03:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

(CSD'd the above 2) → ROUX ₪ 03:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hello, Kralizec! Thank you so much for granting me the rollback feature. To show my appreciation, I have made you a little something.

 Kralizec  ! 

When you click on Kralizec, it directs you to your user page. When you click on !, it directs you to your user talk page. Here is the code:

<small><span style="border: 1px solid; background-color:rgb(0,255,255);">]]</span></small>

When you type ~~~~, this will show. To make it visible, go to "my preferences" at the top of the page. On the front page, put in the html code and check the box below it.

Please reply so that I know you got this message.

If you have any problems with this, please contact me.  Btilm  18:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Help needed

I think you remember this: User_talk:MBK004#Moon_.22men.22, well, it looks like the user is not going to give up, judging from their most recent post: . I'm not happy with the prospect of semi-protecting all the articles on the Apollo program, but a rangeblock of the entire university is not appealing either. Suggestions? -MBK₀₀₄ 19:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Block change?

Hi Kralizec - Is it possible that the recent block you made to 69.201.128.95 should be changed to indef? In addition to the disruption, he was also confirmed as a sockpuppet of indef blocked user Albinofawn here. With months of this type of editing under his/her belt, I'm not sure whether 31 hours is going to make the slightest difference...Your call of course! Cheers, ponyo (talk) 20:49, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

IPs generally cannot be indefinitely blocked. There is a certainly some space between 31 hours and indefinitely, but the indefinitely end of that would be pretty unusual.  Frank  |  talk  20:55, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, of course; I had completely forgotten about the consequences of blocking an IP address. ponyo (talk) 21:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Query on additions to Category:Islands of Alaska

Hello. Could you help me understand why you are adding articles like Kodiak Archipelago and Shumagin Islands directly to Cat:Islands of Alaska? The articles are already members of Cat:Kodiak Islands and Cat:Shumagin Islands respectively, which both have Cat:Islands of Alaska as their parent category. Thank you for your time and consideration, — Kralizec! (talk) 21:56, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe that when someone looks up an article such as Kodiak Archipelago or Shumagin Islands, that it should be under a more encompassing category than itself. Wouldn't you agree? I mean that you would have to click on the category at the bottom in order to even find out what category it fell under. Backspace (talk) 22:43, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:Forgetfullness

Thanks for the kind comment. I guess its one of those signs you have arrived when you do such a good job on something that no one thinks about rewarding you for your contributions :) TomStar81 (Talk) 23:18, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Quick favor

Hey again Kralizec! Could you please delete User:Sesu Prime/QuiFriends and User:Sesu Prime/Status? I only used Qui for about a week before growing tired of it, but never got around to requesting those pages be deleted. Thanks and cheers. -sesuPRIME 09:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch! -sesuPRIME 01:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

User talk pages

Thanks for the comments. I would reply over there but MBK has already asked me to stop leaving him messages as the new messages banner is interfering with his work (which is, of course, fine). :-) - Rjd0060 (talk) 13:36, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Bret Hart

Thank You Commoncase (talk) 15:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Democratic Party (United States)

Hi. I'm interested in knowing why you think the vandalism is so heavy on this article it merits semi-protection. Thanks. ÷seresin 00:19, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I can see that. However, where is the large amount of vandalism that justifies the protection? ÷seresin 00:51, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

If you think your political preferences may have affected your judgment, or how your judgment is perceived, you probably shouldn't have made the call at all, even if you decided to be conservative (no pun intended). I'm not going to unprotect, because you made your ruling and I'll let you keep it. ÷seresin 01:39, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, yes I know about WP:BLANKING. I had made the comment because I anticipated that the warnings would be replaced by further personal attacks. LovesMacs (talk) 04:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: this edit, at the time I thought I was acting properly. I have since reread WP:BLANKING and realize I may have erred in restoring the blanked comments. What do you believe I should have done? Please tell me so I can do a better job in the future. Thank you. LovesMacs (talk) 00:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Coordinator elections

I left this message on Parsec's talk page, and I am leaving it here too: I urge you to run for coordinator for milhist in the upcoming tranche. I feel you would make an outstanding coordinator for the project, and it is my belief that you would obtain a spot should you decide to add your name to the running. You are, of course, under no obligation to run, but an editor of your caliber would be a welcome addition to the force. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:43, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The invitation to run with us is open whenever you decide to run. Until then, fare thee well, and good luck. TomStar81 (Talk) 08:36, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Kumar Sanu

As you are directly familiar with the issue, I turn to you. You semiprotected the article because an anon was adding false and unsourced awards (probably vandalism as you cited). But this anon had created an account Toton 1984 (talk · contribs) and keeps doing the same edits (he did it even at time of protection and did it today). To request a semi-protection will obviously not be enough, so I request your help as you view the situation now. (Note: when not logged in, this individual has changing IP accounts) Shahid • 11:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Userfy/Speedy Deletion

Hellohello,

I created a page for a musician named Pogo under "Pogo (musician)" and it was quickly deleted, as had been in the past. I am requesting to show proof that this page is legitimate or at least userfy it.

Under "Criteria for musicians and ensembles", Pogo does meet criterion 11. His song 'Alice' has been spun on Triple J nationally around Australia. A worker at Triple J Unearthed e-mailed Pogo to say he could play his tracks on air if Pogo posted him a CD. If this is proof enough Pogo said he would gladly to send it your way. I can also rustle up the comments and messages he has received from listeners that report 'Alice' being heard on air.

Thank you for your time! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Verveundertoe (talk • contribs) 14:09, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

history of terrorism, yet again

Since you issued the last block, I thought I'd bring this here in hopes of stunting the edit war. LSG280709 (talk · contribs) came back from his most recent block for edit warring on the History of Terrorism article, and went straight back to his reversion with no explanation. He's made five edits since the return, three of them to reinstate his edit, none of them to explain. I'll confess I'm not familiar with this article, but I'm reverting to the version with more sourcing in the face of the edit war. Thanks! Dayewalker (talk) 22:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for blocking LSG280709 and saving me the trouble of having to report it to ANI.--SKATER 00:26, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Question

Hello, I wanted to run this by you before doing anything. There's someone who is fervently against Barack Obama who has been vandalizing my page from different IP addresses under the mistaken belief that I blindly support everything Obama does when I would have reverted vandalism to the article on the current U.S. President no matter who was elected.

That's the background. There's this edit on one of the IP's talk pages, who hasn't yet been blocked. Do you think it should be reverted and the IP blocked as a WP:BLP violation? Do you think it should just be reverted without any other action? Thanks for your advice. LovesMacs (talk) 03:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I decided to revert the edit on that IP talk page and on another page in the same IP range. I am unsure if further action should be taken because the editor isn't active right now. LovesMacs (talk) 03:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the semi-protection! LovesMacs (talk) 16:12, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks For The Guidance

Thank you. The only thing which makes me not to post a warning message on the vandal user page is their use of a dynamic IP. If you block a particular IP, some good editor might get stuck while he tries to post/edit something useful. On the other hand, vandal will just restart his router and come back with more vandalism. What is the official policy? Sarmadhassan (talk) 07:55, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Please reconsider

...the decline on protection for Albert Pujols. The user involved has refused to be involved in dispute resolution. Discussions on the article talk have become cyclical, and he does not present new arguments. The editor exhibits tendentious behavior and is in continual violation of WP:NOT#STATS. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:23, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem at all. I really do appreciate your assistance. I had reached the end of my rope and would likely have done something that I regretted soon. Thanks for your consideration. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Killervogel5 is *not* being fair nor telling the whole truth in his assessment of the situation, nor consistent in the application of his many reverts of what I tried to post; sometimes he cites real rules, but many other times he just makes up his own rule such as 'No non-Triple Crown stats on the Infobox', which is not mentioned anywhere in the WP rules, nor is followed by many other players' pages I have found. I have repeatedly said I would abide by a third-party independent editor in a dispute resolution. That has not yet been done for over a month, but it appears it will be now. I was trying to show that the dispute is because of the blatant hypocrisy and inconsistency in these rules KV5 says is what WP is trying to follow but clearly WP does not do so, and his editing-reverts is unfairly concentrated only on changes to Pujols' page while ignoring others. Specifically, other high-profile players such as Manny Ramirez, Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez, and Ichiro Suzuki all had sprawling tables for months (years?), and not a peep was ever mentioned about them by KV5 (or other editors) in concentrating his continuous reverts solely on any updates I tried to make to Albert Pujols that incorporated what those other pages had. If I promise not to add any additional tables to Pujols' page, would you kindly change the protection level back to semi-protected? I believe 11 days from today is too long to go without allowing changes, especially now in the closing days of the baseball season when most viewers would want to see the most updated information on many baseball teams, and key players such as Pujols. Thank you. Katydidit (talk) 19:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Talk pages

Thanks for your message (and for blocking that user). If a vandal goes ahead and blanks their page I will often re-add content once to see if that stays, if not I tend not to take it much further, I generally assume you lot know where the history tab is! Regards, RaseaC (talk) 17:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC).

I agree with DENY in most repects and very rarely reverted talk pages until a recent chat with an admin, so for now I'll take your suggestions on board but take each one as it comes. RaseaC (talk) 18:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Can we remove racist comments if a user puts them on their own talk? RaseaC (talk) 19:58, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

quit it =

quit blocking me, it's not me that's the one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Basingwerk2 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Meet my friend WP:RBI. — Kralizec! (talk) 18:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks,  Roger Davies 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

...for your swift action on my report at WP:ANI. Drmies (talk) 03:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Request for input

Hi Kralizec! In light of your knowledge of IP address assignments, your wisdom would be appreciated at Misplaced Pages:Templates_for_deletion#Template:AssignedPA_.282nd_nomination.29. Thanks. -- zzuuzz 19:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Rollback?

No problem! I was wondering if there was such a tool... I would love to have access to the rollback feature and promise to abide by the rollback rules to the best of my ability. Thanks! Wickedlyperfect18 (talk) 05:33, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)

The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Paki90

If you check the recent edits of Paki90 you will see that he has once again started adding Shia Islam to multiple articles. This was part of the issue leading to his probation. Regards, WWGB (talk) 00:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for blocking the user that was vandalizing my user page. Much appreciated! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 04:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Rollback?

First, thank you for the "semi-protection" feature on the S.L. Benfica article. IP vandals have been causing a lot of problems for me and others who monitor and legitimately edit the S.L. Benfica article. Thank you also for offering me the rollback function. I have read the rollback rules and promise to abide by the rollback rules to the best of my ability. Thanks for all your help. Mnunes76 (talk) 08:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

RFPP

I'm not sure why you tagged so many as being checked on at once, but I went through and took care of a few of them. 20-30 minutes seems excessive for these types of requests. I'd recommend tagging one at a time as well. We don't have quotas so there's no need to claim requests. Lara 17:14, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Page protection question

If you've got a second, I'm curious as to why Milkybar doesn't merit indefinite semi-protection, so that I know how to approach similar cases in future. Very nearly every edit to the article is vandalism from an anonymous IP, and I'd have thought that the nature of the edits ("LOL, my friend or work colleague played the Milkybar Kid on TV, it's true!") would have been a minor BLP concern, as the subjects aren't going to appreciate being a prominent Google result, or having a lazy journalist or blogger paste the list of names into something else.

This isn't just one guy vandalising, it's children and bored office workers all over the UK and Australia passing through once and adding the name of the kid in their class, or the guy in their department, who looks like the Milkybar Kid. --McGeddon (talk) 22:43, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Although you're correct that there's been one repeat IP recently, this is a blip - the rest of the edits have been from other addresses who've made different edits, and have never returned to the article. Looking back over the history, the article gets three or four anonymous IP edits a month, invariably adding an unsourced name to the list of actors. It's an old joke, and everyone thinks of it independently.

Apart from a slow pace of "regularly many new vandals", doesn't this tick every box of Misplaced Pages:ROUGH#Criteria_for_semi-protection? --McGeddon (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

The Game (US TV series)

You locked The Game (US TV series). I wish you hadnt. I tried to talk to pink but s/he didnt reply on the discussion page. AOL is a reputable source. The colum writer is a noted journalist for AOL, TJMS, TruTV, E online, and more. As a compromise I included both the AOL source and the TV guide source. pink never replied on the discuss page, s/he just reverted. I made other edits as well but pink ignored. Isnt the standard do discuss before a page is locked? 70.108.70.197 (talk) 01:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

YAHELITE PAGE DELETION?

• • • YahElite - a random question to one of the optional people to contact around here***

I was wondering why there is so much resistance to having a page for YahElite? Surely an established program that was the first or second 3rd party chat client on Yahoo! is a notable subject for a short Wiki article. Chat clients are a pretty large part of the whole chat thingy, and YahElite has been around since the beginning. Unless chat, and Yahoo! are such unimportant parts of society that a client that pretty much spawned an entire industry writing 3rd party chat clients is considered somehow "too commercial" to talk about, it should be able to sustain a very short page.

Look, I get it that Wiki isn't an advertising resource, but I purposely went out of my way to write as neutral an article as I could, considering that if I hadn't found YahElite I wouldn't probably even know how to plug in a computer. I have no profit motive for writing it, I wrote the TOS for it as a favor to the author because of my legalese reading ability, but beyond that, I have nothing to gain, so why on earth would I write a spam article for commercial purposes? Everything I know about computers, damn near, I learn as a direct result of finding and using that client, which put me in contact with all the other chat client writers and gave me an opportunity to learn my craft from them. Literally, thousands of people have been helped by me, as a volunteer problem solver on a dozen different forums, and all of it a result of the chat thingy. People live their entire lives on chat these days - and I cannot believe the aversion to a specific client has spawned such a drive to insure an important part of that phenomena can't have a page, but people can devote an entire page to the use of the word "pwned" in games.

Sheesh, what a ludicrous set of arbitrary standards. I don't really give a damn what you people do about it, but it sure seems like a vendeta, more than a justified reason to be rid of it as "spam". Just my 2 cents worth. Don't feel a need to reply, I only brought it up in case it was a spiteful vandalism thingy or someone really doesn't understand what a chat client means to about 300,000 different distinct users world-wide. IdioT.SavanT.i4 (talk) 08:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)IdioT.SavanT.i4

• • Thank you Kralizec!, for your reply to my query. With that said, your listed standard for what is "notable" enough to have it's own Wiki page is SEVERELY lacking. Other than a couple references to "slang" on gamer related websites, there is no "noted or reliable third party" in any of the linkys that references "pwn" as anything other than a slang term used as a MISTAKE, by some people in texting. Typos deserve a Wiki page but an application that was a leader in an admittedly small but important part of the IM industry - and used by over 300,000 distinct users world-wide, 72% of which are outside of America - is deemed less "respectable"? Sorry, I fail to see that "distinction" as being anything other than arbitrary. Given the numbers of people using the YahElite client every day of their lives, and the limited number of people using a slang word once in a while, I fail to see how one is more "respectable" and deserves it's own Wiki page - a Wiki page I once tried to add an alternate definition to, as used in debate forums, and was reverted by the proprietary maintainers of that page as though I had committed vandalism.

• • List of "published references & reliable "third party suppliers" who mirror or deliver YahElite:
  • messengeroo - most read chat client review site Not many sites review 3rd party chat clients to start with.
  • Portable Freeware Reviews
  • software informer
  • give away of the day
  • soft32download
  • PCQuest chat client shootout
  • About.com
  • Finally, if a 3rd party client spawns it's OWN 3rd party add-on software, it's a pretty good sign the client is worthy of the efforts of other people to make it even better. I know of NO other chat client which has had this happen & I've pretty much tested all of them over the past decade.
  • As I said, there seems to be a distinct culture of "possessive ownership" beginning to evolve within Misplaced Pages, and the more apparent it becomes, the less credible the reputation of Misplaced Pages becomes. It may not be apparent yet, but reputations take a long time to build and very little to destroy. Misplaced Pages, as I see it beginning to mature, is becoming more "corporate", like they are the evolution of Encyclopedia Britannica, and less like a peer-reviewed neutral source for information. What next? Little ads to corporate sponsors on the side windows? Where once Wiki was deemed ABSOLUTE, in terms of neutrality, already I see people beginning to question it as a source that has bias and has begun to fail in it's indefatigable reputation for fairness.
  • I think that is a shame, but as I've maintained all along on this YahElite issue, I really don't shiv-a-git. I had or have no self-interest in it one way or the other and only reformed the page because it would have been useful information for those seeking a source OTHER THAN the various client authors' own self-promotions of their clients. Do as y'all see fit, since it's apparent little of what I think seems to matter. I was just trying to help enlarge the world of available knowledge. Again, thank you sincerely for taking time to reply last time. i4 aka IdioT.SavanT.i4 (talk) 03:53, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

SPI/AIV

There are a series of users who see fit to disrupt the various articles I edit. I've never bothered with reporting to SPI because they can just be blocked by the regular admins instead of there being an extensive sockpuppet report or investigation to deal with them. That's why I've always listed them at AIV.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Without a SPI report that can be used to look at and compare edit histories of past socks with current IPs, I have no basis to determine if your report is an IP-hopping vandal or not. While I have absolutely no doubt as to your dedication to improving the project, the only thing you have given me to go on for these block requests is your word, and pardon me for being blunt, but I am unwilling to risk my admin `bit on the word of someone who lost his. Regards, — Kralizec! (talk) 04:31, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

How's this?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:53, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I can also provide a series of IPs all originating out of South Africa that have also been a single periodically blocked problem user, unique from the prior ANI report, if necessary:

• 41.4.83.39 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.6.62.85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.3.68.178 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.2.178.99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.3.103.24 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.5.145.167 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.6.99.13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.6.235.141 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.6.187.204 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.3.130.34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.3.73.190 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.5.242.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.3.42.47 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.6.238.11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.5.103.90 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.5.196.63 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.2.25.85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.2.241.95 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.2.8.197 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.4.241.193 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 41.3.188.26 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

The pattern is easy enough to catch and the IP addresses are nearly identical.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:05, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

• 41.4.43.219 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Oh look, a new one.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:04, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

• 41.4.153.16 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Another.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 11:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Banned user sockpuppet 94.44.12.90

Cheers for your block on user 94.44.12.90. However, this user (Celebration1981) has been blocked indefinitely, yet continues to evade by using sockpuppets. (See POV-pushing IPs with strong nationalistic agenda.) A longer or indefinite ban is requested. Many thanks!, Rico402 (talk) 20:01, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply on my talk page -- very informative. Best, Rico402 (talk) 07:07, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators,  Roger Davies 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

re: Query regarding AIV report

Hi, I'm really ashamed with that edition :-( , I've made a mistake. In eswiki we have a three revertion rule and I was thinking thet enwiki uses the same rule (since almost all rules of eswiki are translated from enwiki). I'm really sorry and thanks for notice me, with these messages is how we make it better in the future :-) Best regards Manuelt15 (talk) 01:24, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Something's wrong

It looks like you placed this reply in the wrong place. I'm not quite sure where it should be.—Kww(talk) 22:37, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

FYI ANI post you may be interested in

There's an ANI thread at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Breakdown_at_Template:Infobox_Russian_inhabited_locality about a matter you commented on at RFPP.--Doug. 20:35, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Someone just left a message on my page without signing it but I think it was you but I dont know what edit you were referring to and why.--Numbersnow (talk) 07:18, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Block

07:13 . . Kralizec! (talk | contribs) blocked 98.248.33.198 (talk) (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 48 hours ({{anonblock}})

Tsk tsk tsk :) Steve Crossin 07:21, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

And s/he didn't even bother to apologize ;) 98.248.33.198 (talk) 07:24, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

In regards to Jeff G, I already pulled him up on the matter. See this. Steve Crossin 07:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

My apologies. After lifting my mistaken block, I took several minutes to collect evidence and leave a query on the talk page of the person who made the improper reverts and block request. Immediately after that I apologized on the talk page of the IP, then came hear to read my messages. Perhaps I should have apologized first, but given the tool misuse, I felt that was the more pressing need. — Kralizec! (talk) 08:03, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

In case you didn't see the reply on my talk page, I hope you realize I was teasing you about the lack of an immediate apology above. That's what the wink-smiley was meant to convey. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 08:59, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

re Friendly note regarding talk page messages

Okay, I'm very sorry. I was not sure exactly what to do in the situation, I'll take note not to restore self blanked talk pages in the future. Kind regards, --Île_flottante~Floating island 11:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

AIV Comment

Hello Kralizec!. I just wanted to reply to your message to me. I was not attempting to disrupt anything; I am not sure who is a sockpuppet and I don't really care to find out. All I know is that my talk-page was attacked, and I hoped that the AIV would make it go away. Perhaps this does not count as vandalism; I leave that up to others to decide. We've had trouble with these users on the Reference Desk, evidenced by this discussion last week - where I was the chief negotiator to end the disruption; and we really hoped everybody could be mature. All I want is to contribute to the Reference Desk without a hassle. Sorry if my request at AIV was viewed negatively. I'll CC this to fellow administrator User:Dayewalker, who left a helpful comment at my talk page. Thanks, Nimur (talk) 03:25, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

If you look at that discussion on User talk:Nimur, you'll see that things were going along fine until the first of the two socks poked his nose in. Nimur seemed to understand what was up initially, then suddenly did a 180 and somehow concluded I was the one doing the socking, and things went downhill fast after that. Which, presumably, was exactly what the socks were trying to achieve. But the socks are indef'd and all appears calm again. It's worth pointing out that there are rather worse instigators on those ref desks, including a couple of rabble-rousers that we got indef'd yesterday, but Nimur has targeted me for some reason. But hopefully we can work things out. →Baseball Bugs carrots 04:27, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Article edit: Kazakhs

Dear Kralizec,

Please mention that edit was not an experiment or test. The article is about Kazakh people, and the photo is not representative of Kazakh people. It shows 4 presumably nomadic, poor people. The kids and the man look more like Han Chinese. And the yurt is not of construction usually used by Kazakhs. The roof-top structure is different as well as coating.

Thank you for your consideration, Andrew —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.24.61.83 (talk • contribs) 10:31, 21 September 2009

The image caption indicates otherwise. If you disagree with the caption, take it up there rather than at the Kazakh article. As it stands, this is one of the few images we have of Chinese Kazakhs, so it should remain. — Kralizec! (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

You are not being constructive. First of all, the article is about the Kazakh people as a nation, not about how Kazakhs live all over the world. I could upload a picture of the Kazakh family of my friend in LA and caption it "Kazakhs family in LA, USA". But this would be absolutely irrelevant just as the discussed photo is. Even if it actually depicts a Kazakh family - on which I absolutely disagree due to the reasons listed before. Even if it did, it only depicts a single family and is not representative of the community or Nation as a whole. This picture has a very low value, also due to it's date, it was made in 1987 which is 22 years ago, so it hardly depicts a present situation and thus has a low informative value. If you think that's the only picture you could get on Misplaced Pages. I could contact a Kazakh friend of mine in China and get a newer and more interesting photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.24.61.83 (talk • contribs) 10:31, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did at Kazakhs, you will be blocked from editing. — Kralizec! (talk) 11:59, 23 September 2009 (UTC)---------------------

Now you contradict yourself, you said that I should not touch the image and alter the caption instead, and that was exactly what I did.(Quote:"If you disagree with the caption, take it up there rather than at the Kazakh article.") But you just reverted my edit and threatened me with banning. As defined in the article Vandalism is a a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Misplaced Pages. In my case I am trying to improve the relevancy of the content in the article to its name. And I am providing reasoning for my actions, rather than mindlessly deleting the content. This is a dispute over the content of the article and as it is further defined - edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism.

It seems to me that you just have an unhealthy attitude towards the article. And you are using your authority and position of an Administrator to scare me, by intending to ban me. I mean how healthy is that? If you disagree with me - prove me wrong, that's the idea of 💕. The universal access to editing all the content in the attempt to make Misplaced Pages better.

What you are doing - you are just using your authority to prevent the edit that you personally do not like. And the reasoning is quite questionable. I understand you are busy with editing and tidying up huge amounts of data in Misplaced Pages, but your attitude towards this issue is quite unhealthy.

I will try to contact Misplaced Pages management or other administrators about this specific issue, because I think your opinion regarding this specific article is not objective and you attitude is not the one you would expect form the administrators of a 💕. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.24.61.83 (talk • contribs) 09:58, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

As the Kazakhs article itself notes, it is about the "Turkic people of the northern parts of Central Asia" including not only Kazakhstan, "but also found in parts of Uzbekistan, China, Russia, and Mongolia." As such, a photo of Kazakhs in China is both appropriate and relevant to this article. I personally do not have any particular knowledge of or interest in either this article or Kazakhstan, however I was asked to help keep an eye on both as part of a request at WP:RFPP that said POV-pushing was happening to both. As an otherwise un-involved admin, my purpose here is to enforce Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. — Kralizec! (talk) 14:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC) (original reply copied from User talk:59.24.61.83)

If you remember, one of my major arguments is that the picture itself is not proven to depict specifically a Kazakh family. There is no indication of that. The faces of the people as well as the type of the Yurt they use does not comply with Kazakhs looks or Yurt building style. You should understand that there are many Nomadic people in the Central Asian region and parts of China: Kyrgyz, Karakalpak, Jungar - but ut does not mean - they are all Kazakh. That's why I've made and edit to the picture name (which you prevented for no particular reason) - Nomadic People - Not Kazakh. You just want to keep the article as it was - without considering and effort to improve the relevancy of the information presented. The definition presented in the article will need to be revised as well, as it is quite vague. There are many "Turkic people of the northern parts of Central Asia" and not all of them call themselves Kazakh, there are Kalmyks, Tatars, Chuvash etc... You yourself admit that you do not have any knowledge in the issue, then it seems a little strange to me why you prevent my argumented edits. Having lived in Kazakhstan for a while and having studied Kazakh people history, I happen to know some specifics of Kazakh people looks and way of life. I understand that there was a request to protect the article, then the requestee should present his opinion - why he thinks the edit was wrongful. I assume the requestee should have some background knowledge in the domain. Your opinion on this matter is not that of an expert and as far as I understand you are following the procedure, without having ability to analyze whether your actions will do better to the article or not because you don't happen to have any background knowledge on the subject of the article. If your purpose is to enforce Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines this also means that you should make sure that the content presented is relevant and will make the information presented more valuable for the reader. As for this particular picture I do not believe that it pictures Kazakh people, rather is pictures a Nomadic family, moreover it was made in 1987 - which I believe should be indicated in the caption(otherwise people should assume it is a recent picture). Overall, I believe that this photo with its current caption is irrelevant to the article. And "an otherwise un-involved admin" without "any particular knowledge of or interest" in this article I can understand that you are not able to be objective on these edits - because you do not have any background on the subject. Then I should assume that your threats to ban me is just the way to accertain your authority and power in Misplaced Pages.

To put it in simple language you are saying:"I was asked to protect this page. I don't quite know anything about Kazakhs but I can ban you for trying to change something."

As an person with no interest in the article and no background knowledge in the issue, I would expect you to introduce me to a person who issued the requests for Page Protection in the first place. I believe that person should be able to present a well-argumented opinion on why he/she thinks my edits were wrongful. From that point you could monitor our hopefully healthy discussion in an attempt to bring most relevant information to the article to increase its value to Misplaced Pages readers.

Otherwise, as you stated that you do not know much about the content of the article or Kazakhstan and Kazakh people in general, it seems that your attempts to prevent all my edits do not have enough ground under them. ---- Andrew — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.24.61.83 (talk • contribs) 23:51, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

The image File:Kazakhs people.jpg has the notation that it is "Kazakhs people, Xinjiang, China" and as such, this photo is both appropriate and relevant for the "Kazakh minorities in China" section of the article on Kazakh people. Your assertion that you know better because you have lived in and studied Kazakh history is irrelevant as Misplaced Pages policy specifically prohibits the use of personal opinions and experiences. Please note that I am not attached to this particular image, and I would be just as happy if the article used a different image to illustrate Kazakh people in China. My goal in watching over the Kazakhs and Kazakhstan articles is to prevent the resumption of edits designed to remove or obscure the presence of religious and ethnic minorities in Kazakhstan, as well as the existence of Kazakh minorities in other nations. — Kralizec! (talk) 19:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC) (original reply copied from User talk:59.24.61.83)

Block of 199.235.123.238

Hi there. I noticed you have blocked 199.235.123.238 for vandalism; thank you. However, the prior block was only 1 week; yours is 2 years. You may have, understandably, been mislead by the talk page notice which said they were blocked for 1 year; this was later amended to 1 week. Just so you are informed. -kotra (talk) 16:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

It was my impression blanking was frowned upon in all cases. I stand corrected. Thx. TREKphiler 20:02, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

for the Jaclyn Smith protect. Abrazame (talk) 00:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

oh, sure..

.. make me look bad, will ya? (not complaining, just observing it was at the same moment) tedder (talk) 01:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Cough

Ahem! Uncle G (talk) 23:21, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

why image cannot be displayed?

Salam Kralizec:

I am trying to display an image of Hazara man in Hazara people Article but the image is not displayed yet, I have tried many times but no result, Any problem??? can you help me please | - |azaraBoyz (talk) 16:31, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Spam v notability

As an admin, would you review the discussion here and give me your feedback? I still don't see how a claim of notability means a spam article isn't a spam article. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 22:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess not. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 06:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Help Desk?

recently one of my friends (user:kallie_n_kat) became a member of the Help Desk team on a game called Perfect World UK. This gave me an idea: why not create a wikipedia help desk for people who have problems or questions regarding wikipedia and its contents? The idea being to find someone who isn't an administrator but knows a lot about wikipedia, maybe even make a new user called HelpDesk or something, and make a link to their talk page so when people have questions they all know where to go. You don't even have to make that person an admin, and you don't have to pay them either since the Help Desk is usually an all-volunteer crew. On top of that, other users can see what questions people have and--if they know the answer--help out as well. Anyways, just a suggestion :)
Demonlak (talk) 09:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

edit: I see you already have one now, guess I need to look around more. o/
Demonlak (talk) 09:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

IP Block

I know the rules on warning escalation. That's why I was giving multiple level-2 warnings: I wanted it to be clear how much vandalism this IP had done in 48 hours (all with the same modus operandi of adding the name all over the place). I wasn't "escalating," I just wanted to make it clear to the next editor that came along how much blatant vandalism this account had done in the past (much of it reverted quickly by other editors w/o warning). Some of the articles, s/he had to be reverted by multiple times by different editors. And it's obviously not a "new" vandal: the skill s/he shows with using piping to create bizarre redirects shows some experience (among other things, like nicely placing the name in references so it appears like it's supposed to be there, sticking it into film casts just right so it looks proper, i.e., Peter Dais as John Hale in the Crucible). So I placed the warnings as I did. Then, when the IP then clearly maliciously undid my undoing of his vandalism, right after the warning—I gave a final warning and gave up and just cut/pasted the list of the list of the rest of the vandal edits to his talk page. At that point it became clearly blatant. When I report someone to AIV, I do so in a thought-out manner; I have read the policies and try to apply them in an appropriate manner given the particulars of specific situations. I will not utilize a process unless I have some familiarity with how it works; I am not some sort of a loose-cannonball-noob. Furthermore, regardless of my handling of the situation, it seems rather bizarre to decline to block an editor who has made 14 edits of which 14 were vandalism of a clearly insidious and intentional nature. This is not "edit testing" or "sandboxing"—look at the nature of the edits. When there is a blatant vandal, they ought to be treated like a blatant vandal. I was actually being very conservative to start: even though it was clear, I was just giving level-2 warnings for each edit (though clearly redundant, I thought it would at least get the message across that his vandalism "has been noticed"). When the IP then reverted the edit I had just warned him for, that put the button on the case.

Peace and Passion ☮  ("I'm listening....") 03:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I have significantly re factored my warnings; hope that looks better. Was easier to just use Twinkle, but perhaps this is more appropriate.

Peace and Passion ☮  ("I'm listening....") 03:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

See, as an example of my mindful use of escalation, the specific message I added to this only warning I just gave to another IP: User talk:67.76.12.101. He got blocked....

Peace and Passion ☮  ("I'm listening....") 03:54, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Please read what I am saying this time. First of all, the "productive edit" you linked to was vandalism again, just as I had explained. The IP goes all over the place putting the name Peter Dais where it doesn't belong; which is what I said to you in my first post. Then you link me to an instance of that and say "this edit is productive." Did you even read what I had said about this pattern vandal? Now it's 15/15 edits placing the name Peter Dias where it's not supposed to be! Am I not making myself clear? As I said above, there is 100% evidence to assume this editor is intentionally vandalizing (and has done it before, from a different account or IP), based on the skill he shows with placing the name in the script (i.e., hiding it in references so it looks like it belongs, making false pipes, nicely adding it in a cast list for a film, etc.). This is clearly not an editor who needs to be "educated," this is an intentional, educated vandal! What else am I supposed to say? You nicely educated me blocks are "used to prevent continuing disruption." That's what I was trying to do! I gave him multiple level-2 warnings; then when he proved he was going to continue as vandalism-only by reverting my reversion of his vandalism, it came to the point where the block would be "used to prevent continuing disruption!" Then you tell me what WP:BLOCK states. I know! This editor made it patently obvious that they were clearly a "Disruption only" IP; I gave evidence for this. Then the IP goes and does the exact same thing again and you message me saying he's "productive"? What gives? Thanks for quoting a bunch of policies that I already knew to me verbatim; each of them does not apply as you have quoted them in this context. Each situation requires specific and thought out application of the rules, not verbatim quotes from an editor who knows them to another editor who knows them. Thanks. I don't know what else to say.

Peace and Passion ☮  ("I'm listening....") 19:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Just an FYI, according to the IP:

Dr Peter Dias is a researcher published in the medical journal The Lancet.

Peter Dias headed the rise of the Taliban.

The fourth mode of the Double harmonic scale is known as the Peter Dias scale.

Peter Dias is a past member of the band Hooverphonic.

The real name of the author David Goodis is actually Peter Dias.

The role of John Hale in the TV production of the play The Crucible was played by Peter Dias.

Peter Dias is an author for the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal.

Captain Kirk (James T Kirk, to be precise) is Peter Dias.

Peter Dias is a footballer contracted with Chelsea FC.

Peter Dias attended Galen Catholic College.

Peter Dias is a headliner at the Australian music festival "Big Day Out."

A couple of these were reverted by other editors as vandalism, and were just added by the IP again.

Peace and Passion ☮  ("I'm listening....") 19:36, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I can't stand this place. Why am I going around trying to help out when goofs like this get away with just wasting everyone's time?

Peace and Passion ☮  ("I'm listening....") 19:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

P&P - perhaps you can calm down a bit. The IP has made exactly one edit today. I assure you the encyclopedia will not fall apart if we warn a vandal one or two extra times to be sure they "get it" before they are blocked. Issuing multiple warnings in quick succession when the editor is not active will still result in only one orange bar.  Frank  |  talk  19:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

HERE HE IS AGAIN: User:124.181.72.223 (a diff.)

Peace and Passion ☮  ("I'm listening....") 18:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Discovered another one, not sure if you knew about it yet. Both of these (this and the above) have been active very recently (since block for same thing): User:121.219.119.77

Peace and Passion ☮  ("I'm listening....") 18:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

And another!

User:192.148.117.85 . . . here's the Peter diff. I went through the IPs old edits and found vandalism which stood since July.

Peace and Passion ☮  ("I'm listening....") 06:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Awww crap...

User:Jamesistheone

User:121.219.179.189

User:124.181.115.218

I just reverted vandalism to your user talk page by User:I AM PETER DIAS. You might want to look in your history and see it (it's just threatening continued vandalism)

Now just adding slight variations in spelling:

User:180.95.16.17

I don't know if there's any way to protect against this. As I'm not really experienced with coordinated vandalism; I'll just step back and let the people who have experience rooting this out deal with it. It makes me worry how systemic this problem could be (with other IPs with different MOs) for the integrity of the information on the site.

Interwiki hell (seven wonders, etc.)

I'm afraid I know nothing about that sort of stuff; my learning curve was left behind by Misplaced Pages's growing complexity long ago. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:25, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey man. Did you protect Stephanie Birkitt's wiki page? It has no mention of her affair with Letterman on it. Shouldn't it at least mention something about it? Even politely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.20.0.98 (talk) 15:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)

The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

SPI

Hey there. I was cleaning up the SPI clerk list, and I was wondering if you still intend to be active there, as I had not seen you around in a while. If not, I can put you on the inactive list, so that users looking for a clerk don't accidentally try to get you to help them. If you do intend to be active, we should probably get you a new coach, as MBisanz is currently not around at SPI (I'd be happy to take over though). Please let me know what you want to do. Thanks, NW (Talk) 18:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

you've got mail

Beeblebrox (talk) 17:09, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

• The more I go over this in my head, the more convinced I am that I'm imagining things. It just doesn't add up... I'll keep an eye out, but you can probably just ignore that email. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Requirements

On many administrators pages, they have requirements to be an autoreviewer. For example, User:UpstateNYer/Admin. Do you have any requirements?  Btilm  02:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Peter Dais

Following the vandalism to your talk page I've indef blocked the user and raised the issue at WP:ANI#Peter Dais. Mjroots (talk) 07:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Userfy deleted page request

Hi, could you provide me with a copy of Universal Church Triumphant of the Apathetic Agnostic. Also, could you please copy it to User:Ishwasafish/DLNWE#UCTAA. Thanks,

Ishwasafish

19:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit filter

Since you're an admin, you can do it yourself - just go to Special:UserRights, enter your username, and check the Edit filter manager box. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:36, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

• I did it for you.  :) NawlinWiki (talk) 21:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

ruining the article on lebanon

1-The economic damage from the 2006 war has no place in the introduction of the article about the country. 2-The way the info is presented gives the illusion that lebanon never recovered from the war and is still in ruins. 3-not only did the country recover but it also achieved great economic progress during the worst economic crisis in decades.

what i'm asking is, please remove the paragraphe about the damage from the 2006 war immediately soas not to mutilate the article, or you can replace it with up-to-date info from the present i.e the time we are living in. thank you. 91.142.61.4 (talk) 16:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Personally I do not have any particular knowledge of or interest in the Lebanon article, however I was asked to help keep an eye on it as part of a request at WP:RFPP indicating that unregistered editors were attempting to censor the article by removing properly sourced and cited content. As an otherwise un-involved admin, my purpose here is to enforce Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. You were blocked because you continued to revert the article back to your preferred version despite objections that had been raised on the talk page. The fact that you removed the content in question seven times (, , , , , , ) makes this a textbook example of edit warring, hence why I blocked you for 31 hours. — Kralizec! (talk) 07:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC) (original reply copied from User talk:91.142.61.4)

NEA on Miss International 2009

While I agree that the page doesn't warrant nearly two months of protection, it does have quite a bit of activity, including unsourced and vandalism. I was going to protect it for a few days to see if it settled things down- do you mind looking at the edit history or letting me step on your toes at RFPP? (I was midway through doing it a few hours ago, got distracted) tedder (talk) 22:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

(replied over there, but I wanted to say "thank you" for the background story. I'm fine with your call on it, given the context behind it that I was missing.) Cheers, tedder (talk) 06:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Name Change

Dude, I finally fixed my username, but think I lost rollback (because I cannot get Huggle to work). I do not appear on the Huggle list anymore. Any chance you can look into it? -- Mjquin_id (talk) 05:11, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Removing month titles from vandal page

I removed month titles from User talk:75.151.43.138. We have been granting bulk users (schools, generic business sites, etc.) leeway by the month. I was not aware that individual users were on such a long leash. It's one thing to bind a school to a month with walk-in users in library who could be just anybody, but why extend this priviledge to an individual who should, one assumes, know better? This user has been asked many times to cut it out. Dozens of times. Keeping his vandalism to less than 3 a month is insufficient IMO. After 20 or so episodes, I think he needs a time-out. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 23:59, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

edited Muslim population article

Hey Kralizec I was the one who edited the Muslim population article based on this reference page http://www.islamicweb.com/begin/population.htm India Muslim Population: 133,295,077 Pakistan Muslim Population: 125,397,390

Please see to it that you correct the wiki page showing the numbers and statistics of the same nature —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.236.64.72 (talk) 15:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Ignoring the fact that the source you give appears to be a self-published source (which should generally be avoided in Misplaced Pages articles), but it is based on 1971 data. I just do not see how 38 year old data from a questionable source can possibly be better than a 2009 survey published by a reliable, third-party, published source like the Pew Research Center. — Kralizec! (talk) 16:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I am new to Misplaced Pages, so what exactly is the problem you mentioned Kralizec? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.147.168.28 (talk) 02:59, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Request for protection

Hey Kralizec! Looks like you're doing plenty of good work on the Wiki (as usual). Just a few questions:

I put Karl Marx up for a protection request and you posted that the IP(s) were blocked. I'm very glad that there are that many IP's (and the occasional rouge user) that will not vandalize that article again. However I've been watching the article since I started on Misplaced Pages and I did put it up for protection once, it was denied (as far as I know), so I decided to wait for a while. Ever since I have seen very few true, constructive edits to the article. The history page is plagued with IP->revert->IP->revert->etc. When I look at the page now, the first 50 edits you see are in that very cycle. I'm not familiar with protection policy, and do not have the time right now to review it, so I'm hoping you can help me for the future.

Happy editing!

--Marx01 23:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing it and doing your job! Happy editing! Marx01 03:11, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Please block

Greetings Kralizec! - At the beginning of the year you blocked User talk:203.177.74.141 - please re-block.--Technopat (talk) 02:03, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reply. If IP can't be blocked right away, at least it's being monitored. --Technopat (talk) 14:35, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: Misplaced Pages:Template messages/User talk namespace

By all means, re-add the text, although it could be edited a bit (maybe "You should check that the user has made harmful edits since their last warning – the user must be given a chance to see and react to each warning given.") I just wanted to shorten up the intro, which seems to have gotten into the WP:TLDR range, and that caveat seemed self-evident to me, but if your admin experience says otherwise, I defer. » Swpb 19:05, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SS Empire Bay

Hi Kralizec! This is very kind of you but I honestly think I did little to deserve it. Mjroots did all the work; I just turned up because of my Middlesbrough-spelling obsession, and fiddled with that a bit. Even so, I would hate to reject a kind gesture, so thanks! Best wishes, DBaK (talk) 18:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack!

You have been trouted for: Doing a good job and blocking that IP. Also I just felt like it.

List of countries by Muslim population

Ecuador appears twice on the list...

I know I should have left a comment, sorry for this

Best regards

--Laurentleap (talk) 19:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello

I have received your message, but I am currently swamped by midterms. -MBK₀₀₄ 21:11, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Page protection for 2009 Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets football team

Hi, you recently added temporary page protection for this article.. Within a few hours of DumbBOT removing the pp-vandalism tag, the article was again vandalized with the same WP:PEACOCK informal language as before. The legitimate updates are mostly being done by established editors. Could we go for a longer protection period? Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 21:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Erroneous Deletion of Satan's Cheerleaders Entry

I was looking on Wiikpedia for information on the Satan's Cheerleaders, who were go go dancers with the Flametrick Subs in Austin Texas for twelve years, and have performed with national acts and have a international following. They have a lot of cultural and musical significance, and I am not sure why the article was deleted. Thanks!

05:42, 27 April 2008 Kralizec! (talk | contribs) deleted "The Satan's Cheerleaders" ‎ (A7 (group): Group/band/club/company/etc; doesn't indicate importance/significance) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shannalaura (talk • contribs)

Earth Song - article protection

Hi. You protected the article Earth Song from 'excessive vandalism' (a bit of an exaggeration) after a hypocritical (not an exaggeration) plea from Pyrrhus16, a very active contributor who may be incapable of adopting a NPOV towards to any article relating to Michael Jackson. The circumstances of the BRIT awards incident are well documented and were properly referenced in the Earth Song article before deletions by Pyrrhus16. The awards incident should not be portrayed on Misplaced Pages as if written by a fan of one or other of the parties involved. Thanks.

Constant vandalism and disruption

I don't understand why you admins turn blind to Tajik (talk · contribs) when he goes around use sockpuppets in your faces and vandalize pages after pages. Is Misplaced Pages some type of gang related website? User:Tajik is removing sourced material from articles, this is vandalism and you admins allow it. He uses the excuse "falsification and POVs" but it's really him doing those if you concentrate on his edits. These are only few examples: , , , , He and Inuit18 (talk · contribs) (sockpuppet of Anoshirawan) pops up as a tag-team and usually at the same time, I believe that account is shared by him and someone in USA who's English is not so great. It's so strange that he comes everyday but only edit very little, so it's very likely that he's using sockpuppets to evade his 1 RR restriction. Tajik pretends that he is against POVs but it's he that is a POV pusher."The author - in this case al-Biruni - is referring to the Suleiman Mountains. In that case, it is highly probable that he was referring to Pashtuns, because he had described them as a "Hindu people" before.... Tajik (talk) 01:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)". It's very clear for readers here that Tajik hates Pashtuns with great passion so he wants to give them a new history which would make them being Hindus when all the scholars, history books, encyclopedias, and the Pashtuns themselves, disagree. There is "zero traces" of any Hindu culture among the Pashtuns. Anyway, Tajik was blocked 17 times and banned for a whole year but he doesn't seem to care about any of that, he just wants to remove things from articles that he doesn't agree with or doesn't like. This is a serious problem and you guys should put an end to it. I also believe Muxlim (talk · contribs) is him.