User talk:H/Archive 23

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Anita Blake "Vandalism"

• This conversation is in reference to [1] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:44, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

---

I've just now figured out how to work this talk page, so bear with me. A long time ago, you told me to be careful with vandalism. Thank you for the advice. I didn't actually mean to vandalize it. I was at school and the computer shut down and erased the whole thing. I just thought you should know that. I am glad there are users out there who care so much for this website. Mortari 03:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Good to know, we try to assume good faith here. I have removed that warning and replaced it with a welcome, have fun editing. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure :-)

• This conversation is in reference to [2] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:44, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

---

That's quite alright, I will revert vandalism wherever it may be. Blood Red Sandman Open Up Your Heart - Receive My EviLove 07:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

AIV Helperbot

Thanks for the bot! And wasn't I complaining just a few weeks ago about the (database-like) difficulties of keeping AIV synchronized with the work of the admins monitoring the list, and you actually went and did something about it! Thanks again!

Atlant 16:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Wait till my next bot it done, it will help with vandal fighting too. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Help on AIV

Can you direct some of your magical admin powers over to WP:AIV, there's a block request that's been sitting their for almost an hour. Thanks. --Matthew 17:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Patience, hehe, that use has been blocked already(after your post though). Assuming you were referring to User:Christian Slater. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I was reffering to 64.162.183.71, but they've been blocked now too. Thanks for your help. --Matthew 18:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Ahhhh. Hmm maybe a nice feature for my bot would be to put a comment next to a user saying something like This user has been listed for 30 minutes, nah the timestamp on the post is enough. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Your Newest Bot

• This conversation is in reference to [3] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Hope you do not mind me adding the tag to your newest developing bot :)...¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks very nice. Only two things stick out to me, at least in terms of the search patterns:

1. Not sure what the history of the comment texts is — it's possible they've changed over time, so some history digging might be needed in order to find the older comments to find older warnings.
2. The issue brought up originally where if you don't use a template it doesn't come up. So if we follow through with not templating the regulars then this won't work. Maybe add more generic comment detection so that if we're leaving personalized messages, we could just add <!--npa--> to the comment so it'll be found but it won't be a template. That's a pretty kludgy way to do it, but it's the only clean way that I could think of. Regex can only go so far and it wouldn't be guaranteed to find appropriate warnings and not, for example, a user on an admin's talk page asking him to check out a personal attack someone else made. —bbatsell ¿? 15:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

The patterns are of course open to change and additions. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Timecop still with us?

I came across some interesting discussions off-wiki about how to spam Wikipedia, so I check to see which of the participants in that forum had links on Wikipedia. As I was doing this, I came across some potentially odd linkages between Timecop (talk • contribs), Self Torture (talk • contribs) and possibly Family Guy Guy (talk • contribs) as well as a host of IP accounts Family Guy Guy uses for spamming. See the details with links to diffs at:

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#royalessence.com and .medi-vet.com

On the whole, I lean towards believing that Family Guy Guy ≠ Self Torture and that they're just peddling the same rose water. I suspect, but do not know for sure, that Self Torture = Timecop. I may be wrong with both guesses.

In any event I thought you'd want to know, given your involvement with the past Timecop dispute. --A. B. ^(talk) 05:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if they are someone else, but I have warned both for their behavior and added them to my watchlist. Thanks. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Offshoring

• This conversation is in reference to [4] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

---

I put the vandalismwarining because of this edit, not for any other reason. This user is being thoroughly unpleasant and keeps insulting me [5] ie YOU don't really understand the topic. So, please leave the editing to people who actually know something about the topic., which I dont find easy, SqueakBox 20:58, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, the debate on leakage in Offshoring DID cite the Circular flow of income. That is a model in Keynesian economics which has been around for at least the last 60 years and is still taught in economics classes today. This is not "original research", but proven economic fact since before the internet and Wikipedia was invented. 24.17.42.210 20:59, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Yopu cant source from another wikipedia article and in t erms of the first paragraph you have to prove relevance as well as good citations. If your claim on Keynesian politics is true please (a) cite and (b) prove notability, SqueakBox 21:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Squeak, that edit is also not vandalism. Neither are impolite words. This user does not seem to have been exposed to our rules yet, it is not uncommon for new users to not understand our civility and verifiability rules.

Well in that case I was wrong to stick the {{test#}} on his talk page but that was why I did it, SqueakBox 21:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, many people make the mistake thinking something is vandalism when it is not, the main reason being is that Wikipedia has it's own private definition of vandalism. It is always best to go directly to the rules the person is violating and educate them. This will either educate them, or act as proof in the future they were aware of these policies. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

24, I have already responded to this on your talk page stating that Wikipedia does not source itself, I also gave you links to the pertinent policies. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Please examine SqueakBox's comments from the Offshoring history section. He vandalised the page by blanking the content. He was uncivil by making these comments, "rm lecture in economics followed by rant with western POV but this is not a westernj encyclopedia we are international", "rv take your lecture elsewhere and you just added your own pov not a selection", "rm nonsense and pointed out that companies need offshoring to remain competitive". 24.17.42.210 21:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Yes I actually support the use of the NPOV tag and only remove them when a dispute is resolved, outdated or no comment on the talk page after a good few hours and wouldnt in any case dream of claiming that its insertion into an article was vandalism. But on a talk page? On my rather large user talk page? Anyway I certainly agree with you that newbies need to be treated with especial care and thanks for getting involbved (as you may have seen I run an offhsore business so I am passionate on the subject whereas obviously you are (I imagine) uninvolved in this particular topic in your life. Regards, SqueakBox 21:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

As I said on your talk page, per the WP:V:

The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it.

Again, take your pick of the possible sources of information: [6] This is all covered in economics 101 and is considered common knowledge. 24.17.42.210 21:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

It is true that the edit summaries of squeak were less than civil. I apologies for that, you are welcome to politely ask him to be more civil in the future. Removing unsourced information is not vandalism. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:20, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Go back and read my User_talk:24.17.42.210 page from the beginning. SqueakBox was extremely rude, calling me both a liar and a troll. You should bring up the civility and No personal attacks policies with him as well. He obviously doesn't understand them, which is worse than me since he's been around longer and should know better. It appears that you're slapping my wrist while doing absolutely nothing to him. 24.17.42.210 21:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I was only responding in kind, stop attacking then playing the victim, accusing HighinBC of taking sides is plain wrong, he has never been afraid to disagree with me, SqueakBox 21:33, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

It is best to avoid responding in kind. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, this for me is a general life lesson and not one restricted to wikipedia, SqueakBox 22:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, okay, I really am giving a lot of consideration to relations on wikipedia, the good ones make you feel so good and the bad ones so bad, will apologise myself, SqueakBox 21:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

HighinBcbot

I'm hoping I've set Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics up to be indexed by your bot, but I'm a little worried by the leading zero issue. The archives run 01-09, then 10-25. The bot won't think it's 01-025 will it? Steve block Talk 19:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

No, 1 leading zero will results in 01-09, 10-25. I may adjust the instructions to make that more clear, I will run it know and see what happens. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I had to fix up the optin command a bit, the bot does not follow redirects. I fixed up the mask and set the leading zero's to 0 to match the actual placement of the archives. Should work now. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant! Sorry to cock it all up, thank you for fixing it. Do I just leave everything alone now and it'll do its bit when it runs? Steve block Talk 20:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Yep, the rest is fully automated. It will download new archives, as well as old archives that have changed, and update the index as needed. It is currently running when I run it, but once I am fully approved it will become twice daily. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Cheers!

I don't know what you drink, but you have a bot barnstar already, so all I can do is raise a glass and say cheers. Steve block Talk 20:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Ohhh, I love beer! HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Your message

• This conversation is in reference to [7] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Thanks for your message at my Talk page. Once I saw the context of the original diff I understood your concern (that's the problem with bare diffs; they often don't give the whole picture, and need to be accompanied by explanation). It's difficult to tell whether he's as unpleasant as he sometimes seems to be, or just completely socially inept; I hope the latter, and that he can be brought round. From what I saw, he's perfectly capable of contributing usefully, and even getting on OK with other editors. We'll see what happens when the block expires. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Nothing is simple on Wikipedia, never hesitate to question my actions. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Barnster

• Barnstar moved to userpage[8]. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, that makes it all worth while. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFBOT

Your request for expansion has been approved for trials. Please see the page for additional questions. Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 05:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Admin IRC channel

• This conversation is in reference to [9] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Discussion occurred on the arbcom mailing list and on the admin IRC channel. The problem originated in interactions between Giano II and administrators using the channel. Fred Bauder 15:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, so few words, so much information. I appreciate it. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Wiki wa wa

re: User talk:HighInBC/Archive 22#Possible misunderstanding: Your instincts were good; he was a vandal (a sock, actually). I'm familiar with this person; I should have caught it from the evidence on his user page. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 16:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Lol, it is good to be right, but I would prefer to be right about thinking someone will be productive. Thanks for letting me know. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

User: JFBurton

• This conversation is in reference to [10] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 00:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Thanks for reducing that ban. I think 1 week was far too much. JFBurton 16:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

It was 4 days, not a week. No problem reducing it. Have fun. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Block notice

I noticed that you put a block notice at User Talk:141.151.147.2 which stated that he was blocked for 48 hours. He's actually blocked for a week. Is that a mistake or an inside psychological trick to make the guy just give up? I'm always interested in the latest tactics in deterring vandalism. -- Mufka ^{(user) (talk) (contribs)} 17:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, that was in error, I have reset the block to the correct 48 hours. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Johny

Hi, thank you for the quick response in blocking Johny451 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I just wanted to alert you to Johny450 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 451's sockpuppet. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 19:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Taken care of, thanks. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Muhammad/Mediation

Sorry, I forgot about the mediation. I finished reading already, and have restarted. I might ask for help from someone else later if I need help though. I hope I can finish this long-extended mediation. | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 13:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking on such a big task. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome; I don't think I'll be able to equal Ars though, as he had more experience (this is only my second case). That's why I might ask for someone else's help later. | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 23:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding deleted question in mediation

• This conversation is in reference to [11] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 00:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Hi HighInBC. I would like to respond to your question regarding the deleted question in mediation. You may have different expectations of mediation than myself. One of my expectations is that it will help to resolve the conflict. In my opinion, if an editor edits according to the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia, then it is irrelevant whether that individual has the personal opinion Wikipedia ought to be censored. I don't believe Wikipedia ought to be censored, but there is nothing in Wikipedia policy or guidelines that forbids an editor from holding that as a point of view as long as they edit and behave in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. In my opinion, this issue will never be resolved if we continue to allow the personal opinions of editors, which they are entitled to hold, to be brought into discussions. In other circumstances, making comments such as "you wish to censor Wikipedia" might be considered a personal attack. I don't think mediation should facilitate the practice of "looking at the editor" which we work to oppose in other circumstances by asking individuals to identify themselves as holding unpopular points of view. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 15:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The policies are already decided. So what remains is the interpretation of the policy. This is done through consensus. Perhaps the question should be reworded to Do you believe the policies of Wikipedia mandate the exclusion of this type of image. I don't think policy requires the exclusion of this image. So what is left is the ordinary editorial consensus that is applied to any article.

I am not sure how we are to proceed without giving our opinions on interpretation of policy. I am not sure who has made the statement "you wish to censor Wikipedia", if it was me it must have been a while ago because I don't remember. You suggested that a list of potential images be discussed, I don't see how this is any different as it will still require opinion.

Consensus is a funny thing. Opinion is an essential part of consensus that is then applied to policy to resolve ambiguity. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi HighInBC. Unfortunately, I only have about 5 minutes. But I will be available again in a few hours. I did not mean to imply that you said "You wish to censor Wikipedia". As far as I know, you have not. However, such ad hominem arguments have been commonplace in this dispute. Will respond more fully later in the day. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 18:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, no worries there, thanks for the clarification. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

User:GSR05

Has started (as an IP, then under this account) an edit-war on the article list of very tall men, reinserting mercilessly the 6ft 4in section that had been removed on a quite general consensus a few days ago because it is overcrowded and thus not so remarkable. I've reverted him at least 5 times, now i am getting sick of it. Sorry, and thanks. RCS 19:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I see you have already been warned about the 3RR rule, so I will warn the other party as well. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

User talk:HighInBCoffAnalHairs

You seem to be collecting semi-eponymous vandals! Another one blocked. Regards, (aeropagitica) 01:18, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Ya, I am special that way. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 01:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Please Help!

User:68.88.76.165 has now violated the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule on the ramones page. Can you please put stop to this guy, he's been doing this constantly!

Page Blank

It seems that Ahhhohchrist has blanked her User Page. Not that it matters, as what she wrote is in the page histroy. Ahhhohchrist would have been aware of the messages we sent. I doubt she'll come to the discussion. Shame, I wish Users wouldn't do things like this. Acalamari 21:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

It is fine for her to blank her userpage, she doesn't have to participate in the discussion. This is really a common sort of thing. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

User:HBC AIV helperbot

• Barnstar moved to userpage.[12] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow, my 5th barnstar for that bot, that is something. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 18:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.