Misplaced Pages

User talk:Newyorkbrad

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DaGizza (talk | contribs) at 05:35, 13 July 2007 (Hi). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 05:35, 13 July 2007 by DaGizza (talk | contribs) (Hi)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 5 days are automatically archived to User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive/2025/Jan. Previous MiszaBot archives are creatively known as User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive/2007/May and User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive/2007/Jun. Archives prior to May 2007 were compiled by Werdnabot/Shadowbot3 and can be found at User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive1 (prior to October 27, 2006); User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive2 (from October 27 to December 19, 2006); User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive3 (from December 19, 2006 to January 29, 2007); User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive4 (from January 29 to February 27, 2006); and User talk:Newyorkbrad/Archive5 (from February 28 to May 10, 2007). Sections without timestamps are not archived.

To keep conversations together, I will generally reply on this page to messages left here. If you would prefer that I reply on your talkpage or elsewhere, please feel free to let me know.

Please note

I am currently serving as a member of the committee supervising the voting procedures for the ongoing Wikimedia Board of Trustees election. This will consume a significant amount of my Wikitime and therefore I may be somewhat less active on the English Misplaced Pages for a few weeks until the election is over. Thank you to everyone for understanding.

Welcome!

Hello, Newyorkbrad, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Karmafist 15:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey

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

You are so nice.


Vandalism help!

Can you block this user: 209.247.22.164? He/she has been rapidly vandalizing musical theatre articles: Here is his talk page. Thanks!! -- Ssilvers 16:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry NYB for barging in, but from what I saw, it doesn't look like the anon. user was vandalizing, just editing as he sees fit. His contributions don't look like they could harm the community. Nat Tang 16:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm on a train with very limited internet access until about 5 p.m. EDT today, so I am afraid that someone else will need to evaluate this unless it can wait until tonight. Sorry I can't be helpful right now. Newyorkbrad 18:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Having now taken a look, these edits don't look like simple vandalism, although I probably disagree with them. I may be confusing this with another issue, but I was under the impression that there was a discussion about these type of edits on one of the noticeboards, though I'm very sorry I can't recall specifically which one. In any event, hopefully a consensus can be reached on whether to retain the information in the musical articles in this format. Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

It turns out that the edits were made by a sockpuppet for the now-banned User:SFTVLGUY2. They're definitely bad-faith edits. There's a clear consensus at WP:MUSICALS. -- Ssilvers 13:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Can you give me a link to the ban or sock discussion so I can have them handy if this comes up again? Regards, Newyorkbrad 13:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Compilation of principles

You sounded like you were interested in this. An incomplete page has already been started here. Misplaced Pages:Arbitration policy/Past decisions. --MichaelLinnear 01:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I've actually seen that page before, but as you're aware, it hasn't been kept up to date for what looks like years. Historically, pages summarizing all cases have been very difficult to get enough editors interested in maintaining, but I am willing to try to enlist the Arbitration Committee Clerks in reviving this one if (but only if) there is a consensus that the task would be useful enough to warrant the significant effort that would be required. Newyorkbrad 01:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Note

Hallo, I accidentally learned about an ongoing arbitration about myself which supposedly started weeks ago. I am not able to go online regularly before 14 July 07 nor to deal with this issue with appropriate attention. I however will submit a statement and evidence about the issue and related evidence after the above date. Thanks. COFS 12:28, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll make a note of it on the case page. Regards, Newyorkbrad 13:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

My (Kwsn's) RfA

Thank you for supporting my recent RfA. It unfortunately did not succeed. I still plan to continue to edit however. Hope to see you around. Kwsn 15:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please do stay involved, and I look forward working with you as an editor and seeing a more successful RfA outcome in due course. Regards, Newyorkbrad 15:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

arbcom

Arbcom on Armenia-Azerbaijan 2 workshop page became also flooded by accusation from user:Hajji Piruz. We all involved submitted our evidences on Evidence page. Should we go now at workshop page and start put our claims there? I would prefer if Arbcom members will do it - otherwise this page became another channel for attacks from some users. Besides, I would like to draw your attention to user:Mackensen who listed my and user:Atabek violation of parole but missed that of user:Hajji Piruz.--Dacy69 21:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Mackensen is one of the arbitrators, so if you believe he has made a mistake or omission, you should definitely (but concisely) let him know. Whether to put your claims on the workshop is up to you; I don't believe the arbitrators will focus any less on your evidence if you haven't joined the workshop, but a couple of short proposed findings might be helpful to them. Regards, Newyorkbrad 21:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

M.K

That one was simple: M.K. (talk · contribs) has a single edit. The discussed one was M.K (talk · contribs). Not your fault: it originated in the arb page (I've already fixed in the "proposed remedies" place). Fortunately there is no M. K (talk · contribs) yet :-) I am wondering how many accounts like Jimbo WaIes (talk · contribs) Jіmbo Wales (talk · contribs), ... may exist. Doppelgangers' fantasy didn't reach over a dozen.

As for "don't make it again in the future", the only 100% remedy I know is to cut and paste names from a reliable source. (As a programmer, I know this from long experience: variables with nearly identical names is a source of bugs difficult to detect.) `'Miikka 15:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

In other words, no final period in "M.K" - got it. I'll make sure to mention it to whatever clerk winds up closing the case when the voting is finalized. Regards, Newyorkbrad 15:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Your participation at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 5

Hi Newyorkbrad,

I appreciated your input at the Father Goetz School deletion review, but I think I need to warn you that your !vote will be discounted by the closing admin if you don't tie in your comment with either a procedural violation or new information. If you have the interest, please take a look at the comment I posted immediately after yours. I think it gives a good rationale for overturning the previous result. I think this deletion review will close today or early tomorrow, so please don't delay, act now and take advantage of this limited-time offer! Noroton 16:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. Candidly, I don't think I have any additional points to make in this discussion; I just find the endless repetition in these schools debates to be a poor use of everyone's time, and therefore have advocated that we simply declare all high schools above a certain reasonable size to be per se notable and be done with it. Regards, Newyorkbrad 16:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: State terrorism by the United States

The anon that made the report has nothing but disruptive towards that article. Also, here's the reverts he mentions:

  • - obviously not a revert
  • - not a revert, this is the first edit of its kind by anyone
  • - first revert
  • - self-reverted my previous revert after another editor requested
  • - obviously not a revert
  • - first revert

Thank you for the reminder and kind words though. Please reply on my talk page if you have any other issues. east.718 18:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I think we are okay. Regards, Newyorkbrad 18:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Is this okay?

I hope this is allowed. When I saw that those 3RR reports had been made by someone who wasn't logged in, I changed the "Reported by" to reflect how their identity appeared in the page's history. It just seemed like there wasn't any way to know that it was user, "Anon", if they weren't logged in. (Please just revert my changes if they were wrong) Bladestorm 18:40, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I had already spotted that the reports were actually by an anon, but your edits were fine. Thanks for your attentiveness. Regards, Newyorkbrad 18:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Jocker City

How can I look at the Jocker City article (now at DRV) without actually restoring it? -- Jreferee 22:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

If you are logged in as an admin, at the top of the article page, you will see the heading "view or restore 15 deleted edits." Click on the words "deleted edits," and that will bring you to a screen which shows the various now-deleted revisions. Clicking on the date and time of one of those revisions will bring up the deleted revision in an edit window. As long as you don't actually click "restore," the deletion will remain in effect. Regards, Newyorkbrad 22:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. After following your instructions, I modified them a little and am using them here. -- Jreferee 23:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Undo option ?

Lately i noticed when i check the history of the articles i noticed the undo bit at the end of each revision summary and i was wandering if it's something i need to know about thanks Richardson j 02:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I think Help:Reverting#Undo will give you the explanation you are looking for. Hope this helps. Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Richardson j 23:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Second opinion/reality check, please

Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Abusive_sockpuppetry_by_The_Cunctator. Thatcher131 13:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I see that some more people have been commenting in the thread and I think the consensus is about right. This isn't a situation a la Runcorn or Henrygb where there have been (e.g.) multiple !votes in the same RfA or XfD, so I don't know if the line was crossed into truly abusive sockpuppetry. Nonetheless, this is far from an optimal use of multiple accounts by an admin, and I think The Cunctator has started to figure out that there is some disapproval of what he has done. Given his extreme seniority here, hopefully the problem will not recur at any time in the future. Regards, Newyorkbrad 15:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

A question for you

We have never interacted (one of the reasons I chose you) and you have a reputation for being level-headed and reasonable (the other reason I chose you), so my question is this: Do you see anything inappropriate about one or more userboxes on this page: User:Robmiller? I ran across that page almost at random, and in addition to the bizarre (and conflicting) userboxes, I saw a couple that were patently offensive (one in particular, and another that is somewhat less so.) Would you be willing to take a look at that page, and tell me if you think that I am over-reacting, or if I am on-target? I generally don't like the idea of policing user pages, but I really question the appropriateness of a couple of the items on that page, and want a second, unbiased opinion. Thank you. Horologium t-c 22:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

... I don't think I've ever "shouted" before in wikipedia, but...
WHAT THE *BLEEP*?!?
"This user believes in traditional rape"?!?
"This user believes in drugging as an alternative to romantic sexual intercourse"?!?
I notice that an IP added those boxes to his userpage... question is, what's to be done about it? Bladestorm 23:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Horologium, thanks for the kind words. I've reverted the page to the last version created by the user, since there is no evidence that he was editing from that IP. I agree that several of these userboxes are patently unacceptable, and should be tagged for speedy-deletion or submitted for deletion at MfD. Newyorkbrad 23:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I had noticed that they were not templates; they were "locally produced" on his userpage, but I missed that they were inserted by an IP editor. (I would have reverted them myself if I had noticed that). Since they are not templated, there is nothing to submit for MFD, which is a good thing, although it might be necessary to go through all of the contributions of that IP, and see if he did the same thing to other users. That's a pretty slimy thing to do. Horologium t-c 23:49, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I checked the IP after Bladestorm pointed it out. There are no similar edits from that IP anywhere else. Newyorkbrad 23:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

TREYWiki

I left a reply at my talk page. The cliff notes of it is that for right now, let's leave it the way it is. If the ArbCom said he can vanish, then we will let ArbCom do it. Apparently, I found out that the page was deleted, then restored, then blanked by TREYWiki, but reverted back to me by another user and relocked until ArbCom is done talking with the admin. User:Zscout370 01:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Responded on your talk. Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For removing this nonsense. I would have done so if not for having just username blocked the nominee.--Chaser - T 04:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

--Ideogram 14:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

*Reply

&reply = User:Jouster/open/VPP#Purpose_of_this_page.3F; // Jouster  (whisper) 20:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Responded there (and I have it watchlisted, so no need to cross-post here again, but thanks for the precaution). Newyorkbrad 20:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Ttkrevenge

I noticed you blocked the creator of Red ambulance for the attack page and the username. May I ask why the username? I can't see anything wrong with it and would want to know if ever I should need to report something similar. -WarthogDemon 00:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

In the context of an account whose only edits were creating and re-creation a particularly nasty attack page, the word "revenge" in the username strongly suggested to me that the editor was here to harass someone rather than to make any good-faith contributions. Newyorkbrad 01:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Good work on not overlooking the obvious. I'll try to keep an eye out like that as well. -WarthogDemon 01:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Good job on the election

Thanks for all your efforts there. Georgewilliamherbert 01:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi

After the Hkelkar 2 case closed, User:Dangerous-Boy updated his page with this . He uses the Roman empire analogy once again, which I find quite depressing since it reminds me of the personal attacks he launched at me previously Also while it is only indirect, I interpret the message as WP:BATTLE since Caesar "won." I would've posted this message on his talk page except lately he has been accusing me of trolling and stalking him which is why I ask you to discuss this issue with him. Unfortunately, most of the parties involved in the case can't avoid each other completely because of our similar editing areas, which is why I wish for everyone to move on at least for now. Thanks! Gizza 05:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)