Misplaced Pages

User talk:Hu12: 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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:55, 4 February 2009 editHu12 (talk | contribs)91,877 edits journal group← Previous edit Revision as of 03:45, 8 February 2009 edit undoAbd (talk | contribs)14,259 edits Your (old) block of User:Lyriker: new sectionNext edit →
Line 141: Line 141:
Thanks for your explanation ], and sorry for wasting your time. -] (]) 19:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC) Thanks for your explanation ], and sorry for wasting your time. -] (]) 19:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
:Not a waste at all. Keep up the good work! Cheers--] (]) 19:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC) :Not a waste at all. Keep up the good work! Cheers--] (]) 19:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

== Your (old) block of ] ==

16:24, 23 January 2008 Hu12 blocked Lyriker (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite: Usernames that contain a domain or imply a web address)

Lyriker was accused of linkspam. Whether or not what Lyriker did was linkspam, pointing to pages on lyrikline.org (I have serious doubts about that, and evidence of linkspamming included the links added to de.wiki ''which have been judged to be acceptable''), the block based on the user name was a total error. "Lyriker" simply means, in German, "poet." "Lyrik" means "poetry." Basically, an easy AGF construction of what happened was that a user who is interested in poetry (as can be seen by contributions on de of this same user, who has the user name Lyrik there) finds that there is a poetry site which contains permitted copies and audio contributed by poets, so this user starts adding the links, believing them to be useful. There is no "domain" or "web address" implied in the user name, you could not find lyrikline.org simply by knowing the user name Lyriker. Please unblock; failing that, please permit another admin to unblock, should I find one willing to do it. Thanks. --] (]) 03:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:45, 8 February 2009

There is no Cabal

6,937,224 /Sandboxx

Archives
/Archive /Archive2 /Archive3 /Archive4
/Archive5 /Archive6 /Archive7 /Archive8
/Archive9 /Archive10 /Archive11 /Archive12 WP:GRIEF m:MPOV

Wednesday 8 January 16:31 UTC



If I start a conversation on your talk page, I'm watching it.
Please leave responses on your talk page. Thanks.
Another key to the problem here, {name of contentious editor}. You don't see yourself as having an opinion; you see yourself as bearing the Truth. You perceive your biases as neutral..
— WP:TIGERS
  • Old PROD
This is a list of deletable PRODs.
Category:Expired proposed deletions
  • Category tracker
This is a readout of various categories.
  • RfA tracker
This is a readout of the current RfAs.
Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)


Welcome

Welcome to the talk page . Still on the road dealing with a host of stuff, Lack of responses during this time is to be expected. Will check in when possible, wishing all a Happy New Year. Be back shortly.--Hu12 (talk) 22:56, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Spam
Support this page by clicking on this advertisement. Receive a "free" userbox!!

Welcome back

Thanks for the block on User:SecondMarket, Inc. - I had already reverted a few of those links popping up and was going to have to look for some assistance if there was recurrence. The company itself has been increasing its profile recently and was profiled in some trade publications around trading CDOs but the recent postings are just blatant spam.

Separately, although we had our run ins in the past, I was glad to see you back on after a long hiatus. |► ϋrbanяenewaℓTALK ◄| 00:15, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Water under the bridge. Keep up the fine work ;). --Hu12 (talk) 21:54, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Appreciate it. Hope we can find something to work on as you ease back in. Regards |► ϋrbanяenewaℓTALK ◄| 04:53, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Good to see you back

Have a good new year. TastyPoutine 00:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

You as well! cheers--Hu12 (talk) 21:55, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Yay!

Good to see you, Welcome Back! :) --Versageek 01:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreed - welcome back Hu12! I was shocked to see you beat me to a spam revert. :) Kuru 21:04, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Missed you all for sure! Although I still have my hands full, I will check in when its possible. If at times I can't respond, its good to know others are keeping an eye on my talk page ;). Happy New Year. Cheers --Hu12 (talk) 21:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm also very glad to see you again. I was beginning to think all my old friends had faded away... — Satori Son 15:55, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Hu12, welcome back to the fray! I hope you are still open to spam questions and giving general advice.. EdJohnston (talk) 14:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, thank you for backing me up here. Themfromspace (talk) 09:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Conversation on http use

A conversation has been started about the use of http links on the WT:WPSPAM page. As a frequent editor of that page, your input at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Spam#http use on this page would be appreciated. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 16:14, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Response - LuckyLove8

Hi Hu. I put up a brief response to your recent edits. I won't revert them. I want you to reconsider in light of my arguments and consider reverting them yourself.

thanks LuckyLove8 (talk) 09:25, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Music

Exclaim! is a wholly valid and reliable source for music articles, not a violation of WP:SPAM or WP:EL. It's one of the two Canadian music magazines, the other being Chart, that are absolutely core sources of equivalent validity to Rolling Stone or Spin. Bearcat (talk) 19:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#exclaim.ca. Agents of this publication have proliferated an extensive spam campaign. This violates multiple policies. Only the editors in violation have been removied, good faith additions still remain, and won't be removed. Here are the rules;
--Hu12 (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

sbl log format

Hi!
Pleas use this format for the sbl log, tia. -- seth (talk) 17:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Unblock request of HDRO-UNDP

Hello Hu12. HDRO-UNDP (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards,  Sandstein  19:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Comment: I think this user could be unblocked contingent on a username change and a commitment to WP:COI-compliant editing.  Sandstein  19:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with your assesment/comment. I still have concerns...
...then at least allow me to continue editing pages that relate to our work
— HDRO-UNDP 19:00, 19 January 2009
However, providing past COI contributions are not repeated, a second chance should be given. Thanks for the note, Sandstein. --Hu12 (talk) 18:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

journal group

Hu, please see my note at User talk:Akradecki. I'm removing the spam parts & upgrading as i go, title by title, it'll take me a few days to finish, but they are quite respectable titles & I'll take responsible for keeping their PR guy honest. DGG (talk) 04:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I see that instead of giving me that courtesy, you nominated it for deletion just a few hours later, and didn't even notify you. I would not treat you--or anyone else at Misplaced Pages--that way. I respect your work, and I expect or at least hope that you will respect mine. DGG (talk) 05:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
perhaps we should have a conversation? email?DGG (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Why? Afd was already mentioned on the other talk page, prior to your posting here and prior to me nominating them. If a few of those mktng articles get deleted its less work all around. If we choose to focus on our percieved differences, despite the many good things (I believe) we have in common, discussion won't help. If you feel besmirched because of the nominations, I apoligise. As I've said in the past, I do respect you, Perhaps I should have been more thoughtfull in this instance. --Hu12 (talk) 22:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Associated content.com - thanks

Thanks for your explanation here, and sorry for wasting your time. -kotra (talk) 19:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Not a waste at all. Keep up the good work! Cheers--Hu12 (talk) 19:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Your (old) block of User:Lyriker

16:24, 23 January 2008 Hu12 blocked Lyriker (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite: Usernames that contain a domain or imply a web address)

Lyriker was accused of linkspam. Whether or not what Lyriker did was linkspam, pointing to pages on lyrikline.org (I have serious doubts about that, and evidence of linkspamming included the links added to de.wiki which have been judged to be acceptable), the block based on the user name was a total error. "Lyriker" simply means, in German, "poet." "Lyrik" means "poetry." Basically, an easy AGF construction of what happened was that a user who is interested in poetry (as can be seen by contributions on de of this same user, who has the user name Lyrik there) finds that there is a poetry site which contains permitted copies and audio contributed by poets, so this user starts adding the links, believing them to be useful. There is no "domain" or "web address" implied in the user name, you could not find lyrikline.org simply by knowing the user name Lyriker. Please unblock; failing that, please permit another admin to unblock, should I find one willing to do it. Thanks. --Abd (talk) 03:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)