User talk:Master of Puppets/Talk/Archive/Archive19

Archived Discussions

Archive 1: 39 topics. (27 November 2005 - 27 February 2006) Archive 2: 41 topics. (28 February 2006 - 15 March 2006) Archive 3: 40 topics. (15 March 2006 - 23 March 2006) Archive 4: 40 topics. (23 March 2006 - 5 April 2006) Archive 5: 42 topics. (5 April 2006 - April 16 2006) Archive 6: 38 topics. (16 April 2006 - April 22 2006) Archive 7: 40 topics. (22 April 2006 - 7 April 2006) Archive 8: 40 topics. (27 April 2006 - 1 May 2006) Archive 9: 46 topics. (1 May 2006 - 5 May 2006) Archive 10: 60 topics. (5 May 2006 - 16 May 2006) Archive 11: 65 topics. (16 May 2006 - 22 May 2006) Archive 12: 60 topics. (22 May 2006 - 30 May 2006) Archive 13: 119 topics. (30 May 2006 - 15 August 2006) Archive 14: 45 topics. (15 August 2006 - 24 September 2007) Archive 15: 24 topics. (24 September 2007 - 29 November 2007) Archive 16: 93 topics. (29 November 2007 - 31 December 2007) Archive 17: 75 topics. (31 December 2007 - 24 January 2008) Archive 18: 136 topics. (24 January 2008 - 24 February 2008) Archive 19: 102 topics. (25 February 2008 - 14 March 2008) Archive 20: 100 topics. (15 March 2008 - 23 May 2008) Archive 21: 100 topics. (24 May 2008 - 30 September 2008) Archive 22: 100 topics. (31 September 2008 - 10 November 2008) Archive 23: 100 topics. (10 November 2008 - 16 December 2008) Archive 24: 100 topics. (16 December 2008 - 28 February 2009) Archive 25: 100 topics. (28 February 2009 - 14 October 2009) Archive 26: 100 topics. (14 October 2009 - 7 February 2011) Archive 27: 183 topics. (7 February 2011 - 2 January 2013) Archive 28: 137 topics. (21 January 2013 - 12 September 2014)

If you wish to revitalize an archived discussion, please copy and paste all text, formatting included, to the bottom of my talk page. Thanks!

Top of Page

Stop being an aussie

I can't mate. I was born that way. I tried searching for refs to fix his page for him but I couldn't find anything? I've been trying to prompt him to read up on referencing etc. What do you suggest I do? Apart from being an Aussie that is ;-) Sting au Buzz Me... 00:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes I already pointed him to those. I see someone else trying to point him towards references now. The notability tag is to alert other editors to the fact that it needs work. I'd thought about AfD'ing it but as you say state published doc etc (the ref he gave had nothing). I too think it likely notable but would still like to see at least something linked to a source to satisfy WP:V. Sting au Buzz Me... 01:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Nah it's cool. The creator of the article cleaned it up nicely himself. I removed the notability tag. He just needed time to read up on how things work around here. Come to think of it I'm still learning myself! Anyhow, he will most likely become a good editor around here. Sting au Buzz Me... 04:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

New Topic

Could you take a look at the Freenode article? The F is being displayed as lower case. Maybe it is my browser, I am not sure. When I click history, it displays the F as capital. When I try to move it, it displays it as capital. Would you know what is causing this? Thanks. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 02:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I just was wondering why it was lower case but when I went to history and move it was upper case. I just wanted to make sure nothing was wrong. I understand now. Thanks. Cheers. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 12:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Bosnian rocks

Eh kako si sta ima? Nisam mislio ista napisat dokle nisam procitao da pricas Bosanski. I ja sam rodjen u Bosni - bas u Sarajevo - i zivim u Australiju. I'll type in English from now as it's way easier. I'm 17 years old btw and like your taste in music (mine is slightly heavier but classics r cool 2). Anyway that's it from me. Just wanted to say hi to a fellow bosnian... hi. Now bye

Eh! Nisam znao da ima nasih na engleskoj. Ja sam rodjen u Sarajevu, kod one slasticarnice, sa sladoledom, nemogu se sjetiti kako se zove. Jos malo sam zaboravijo kako da typkam na bosanskom. Ajde, vidimo se okolo. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 17:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Userpage

Thanks! for considering my request. Well my userpage looks just like a mess, so i want it to look nice for example just as yours. --SMS ^Talk 06:17, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Well i m totally confused regarding the style of the page and how to arrange everything, and I also lack the sense of creativity, so can't think of an appropriate style. And yes i do like the colors used in my signature. I am too ashamed for asking you doing one of my own work. --SMS ^Talk 17:21, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it will be ok, but i think i have tried doing that, but that didn't work, but you can try too! because i may have missed something. --SMS ^Talk 14:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Hey Master of Puppets. You have no idea who I am but I've been a fan of your editing and especially your icons. We had talked a long time ago about userpages. Anyway, to the point I just saw you recently became an administrator and wanted to congratulate you. Mkdw^talk 10:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

I would like to know how to make and edit a template, & what magical powers admins get. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 17:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

What is rollback? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 17:16, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Another question, if there is a vandal that needs to be blocked, what do I do? Once, I experimented on my own talk page by putting {{block}}, and noticed that it worked. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 17:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

What are guidelines for signatures? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 17:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I would like to move a page to a page that already exists (as a redirect). The pages are: Harlem to Harlem, New York. When I tried, it said that it couldn't (already created page (H,NY)), and it told me to get administor help. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 17:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

No, not really. It's just my thinking that it would make more sense to move it to Harlem, New York. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 17:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Most userboxes are linked w/ categories. How would I get the ones that aren't linked, linked? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 17:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Does your username come from the song? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 18:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

What do you think about Texas Society of Microscopy? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 18:04, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

That's what I thought, the not-notable bit, but I think I'm going to create the Microscopy Society of America article. Do you think that is notable? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 18:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Another question... when I'm on new page patrol, I notice these articles about people. They are not cited, not at all written (e.g. typo is tyop, and That person is... is Pershon tha is), but they include accomplishments. I'm not sure if the person is real or not, but it they are, the person is noteworthy. What should I tag it as? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 18:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

This is just the beginning, but what do you think of this: Microscopy Society of America? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 18:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

How is that? There isn't that much out there (on the web), though. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 18:39, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you think I should move it into mainspace? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 18:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I think it was a week ago... you said that I'm not too far from graduation, when is "not too far?" Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 18:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Not to seem that I want to leave your choking grasp (just kidding) helpful outreaching arms... for I was just wondering what you meant. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 19:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

How do admins delete pages? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 19:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

:) Cool. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 19:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Why did you delete the pear userbox you had? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 21:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... okay. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 21:35, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

We have reached consensus... that Maximillion Pegasus' header is "damn cool." Thanks for voting, in a vote that closed 3 support, 0 oppose, and 0 neutral.

By the way, what is the point of voting "neutral" in an RfA? As I have observed, some users do that. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 22:17, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

What should I do about this? A person created this article, as a test, yet I believe it to be correct. I have re-written it nicely. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 22:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I AfDed (that's a strange word) it. See here. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 22:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Rooting for Ellen Page? And can admins edit the main page? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 00:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

What is the "lowest-level" of a bite? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 02:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

If I encounter a page that is not notable, but true, how should I go about telling the user? I don't consider the nn-warnings too kind. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 02:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I see that you've changed your icons. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 02:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of pages, you did a great job on mine. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 03:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

When did you adopt me? Do you know? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 03:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I found it. 20th of December, 16 days after -Midorihana-. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 03:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		This is the Academy Award for Best Choking of a Supporting Actor User. Basketball110 what famous people say 04:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The gallery needs filefolders. Awards are nice, don't change. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 04:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

User penguin somewhere on or for the awards, and the Mr. Potato Head for gallery. Got to go. Talk someother time. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 04:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

A recall is a time in which a user requests the recall of an admin to regular user, correct? If so, can any user request a recall, or must if be an admin? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 19:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Is there anything I haven't asked yet that I really need to know? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 23:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

It too bad you don't know everything. You could make a lot of money. By the way, what is the secret to the universe? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 02:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you know User:Blofeld of SPECTRE? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 03:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I hope he does. He really got upset about that Mocu thing. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 01:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Are you still open for adoption? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 23:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

That is what I was asking. Sorry if I worded it incorrectly. You've got three of us, correct? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 01:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I've got a friend (real life, if any Wikipedian has any idea what that is) who might need some guidence. He asked me a lot of questions today (real life). I offered him adoption, but told him he'd have to wait a while. User:Dabombnow. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 01:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think he's edited mainspace yet (as a user). As an IP, he did though. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 01:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Will you sign my guestbook? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 01:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Were you "almost" tricked? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 01:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Currency

Thank you so much for your pointer. Tim riley (talk) 17:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

RTV

Thanks so much for deleting my userpage, but I need desperately for my name to be removed from this site; is there anyway of stopping it from coming up in the histories of articles? Can you rename me to User:0000000 or something? 18:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid there's no way to completely remove your account; if you want to, go to Wikipedia:Changing username and request a namechange, as I can't change names. Good luck, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 18:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

böserup

thank you for your help or input. i have actually found a solution to my problem. let's hope that no further confusion will be caused. i think someone should try to merge the info from both pages into somethig really informing. i will suggest it in the discussion page. sadly i am not competent enough. cheers--Ludo86 (talk) 21:44, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

AIV report error

Aah, thanks for the heads up. My report was based on the warning last month, which said if the user vandalised again, the block would be extended. I quickly realised my mistake in filing a VIA report (it was my second; I'm learning :)) so I assure you my reports will be properly... thought through next time :) Thanks! PeterSymonds | talk 22:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Um, MoP...

...HotBuch wanted to be adopted, per this diff which you reverted. I don't think that warrants an indef. Apparently he didn't know what and what not to do. I think you should let him go, let me tutor him, and if he still vandalises, indef him again and give me a permanent WikiBreak. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 22:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC) I strike. Good call, MoP. --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 23:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

LOL, no I didn't. But I saw the sock tag on his page and I'm like, "Okay." --Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 11:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

Would you mind taking a look at my contributions and telling me if I have improved any since adoption? I have studied Wikipedia policies and guidelines and believe I have a good grasp of them. Just wanting to know if you think I have improved any. Thanks. Cheers. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Thats good to know. Cheers. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 02:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I hope you do not mind me doing this? Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 03:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Cheers. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 03:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if you are aware. Discussion of more bureaucrats on talk page. Cheers. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 02:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, ok. Your welcome. Cheers. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 03:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

This is an easy question, but how do you say things like "* MasterofPuppets chokes on woodchips" on IRC without the normal "<nickname> Then comment"? Thanks. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 03:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I am going to bed now, but you can go ahead and reply. Thanks. Cheers. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 04:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I got that, but I don't think you got my reply. Anyway, thanks. And you sleep well also whenever you go to bed. Cheers. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 04:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Infoxbox for OpenTTD

Hi there, You didn't do it the way I actually wanted. See Mozilla Firefox's page. What I want to do with the templates I made is a way so that people can change version numbers by just clicking on the add & can change the dates & the version number. Its easier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shirishag75 (talk • contribs) 05:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Spore Edit War on Again

Hi, I figured I'd cross-post this in your talk page too, since you've been involved in the Spore article.

You may need to look at Spore again. There seems to be a minor edit war going on, again. JAF1970 removed all references talking about the Wii version, trimming it down to a single unsourced line where he forgot to remove the "Wiiwii" reference. Sillygostly then merged the Spore Creatures and Spore Mobile articles into the Spore article, which will no doubt be a controversial edit.

There has been no consensus and really no discussion about what direction to take the article in. I'm not sure if it needs outright protection again, but it may need watching by someone wiser than I. KiTA (talk) 14:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Helping me!

Hey thanks for the offer MoP! I was looking for a user page layout to organize my page and wanted something like you've got on yours. Maybe a bar for navigation like on yours and a "show and hide" code possibly.

Thanks- Letter 7/Caleb (talk) 14:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

{{Archive box}} images

Regarding your edits to the template and doc: Does it work? At least the precise syntax you provided does not:

Dorftrottel (bait) 19:28, February 25, 2008

Username

Just wanted to mention you have an awesome username. Combining 2 wiki-memes (SOCKS and Mops) in one is really cool. MBisanz ^talk 20:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Desysop'd

You have been desysoped indefinitely from sysoping in accordance with Jimbo policy. If you believe this desysoping is unjustified you may attempt to bribe a steward or bureaucrat. If you'd like to be kicked while you are down, include {{indefblockeduser}} above. You may not remove this Jimbo notice forever because I am godking. Good day, little insignificant speck of dust, Jimbo Walesego 04:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

User: ForeverFreeSpeech

I think he was within his rights to make the revert, but I've warned ForeverFreeSpeech over his use of the word "liar" here. Probably a violation of WP:NPA.

On the other hand, Eleland still hasn't responded to the question of his edits (and why he claimed he was reverting "mass removal of sourced info" in this diff on the talk page, which makes me think ForeverFreeSpeech should be given some leeway. It can't be easy to try to deal with someone who blatantly mischaracterizes an edit summary like that.

I'm also not convinced Eleland's "source" for his "very well known claim" is valid as per WP:RS either (though I'd still prefer the section go to another as seems most likely in the admittedly small 4-person consensus here, then we still have to deal with the sourcing issue on that page).

Also, can you teach me the format for the "this edit should have been signed by"? ForeverFreeSpeech forgot to sign when he posted (see diff).

Thanks, M1rth (talk) 01:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Oops

You accidentally deleted Talk:California State Route 57 when you deleted Talk:57 Express Lanes. --NE2 03:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Rod Laver semi-protection request

You declined this request, saying, "There is not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection at this time." I ask you to reconsider. Here are the diffs for the disruptive edits in February alone (reverse chronological order): (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8) (combined consecutive edits by IP), (9) (combined consecutive edits by IP, (10) (combined consecutive edits by IP, (11). There were many more in January and December, with incivil edit summaries containing the following language (all spelling mistakes are from the IP): "mr arrogant," "ruthless uncvil vandalism," "ruthless bully," "rubbish by tennis arrogant," "bully boy actions," "arrogant egotistical jerk," "he's not god but acts like he is," "arrogant vandalism," "your massive ego and incredible arrogance," "reada book you jerk and stop interferring in good work because you ignorant and pedantic," "your ignorance no reason to not include fact," and "just becqause yourignoraqnt does not mean its not true." Thanks. Tennis expert (talk) 04:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I am again asking you to reconsider. Please see this. Thanks. Tennis expert (talk) 20:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure how a person could be said to be editing in "good faith" when he or she is as incivil as the person has been for the last 3 or 4 months. Most of this person's edit summaries are insulting to me. Have you looked at them? They're available through the history of the Rod Laver article. This person is a suck puppet for a registered user, Jeffreyneave. As for the quality of this person's edits, he's been asked to source controversial quotations. He refuses to do so. He's been asked to quit making tables internally inconsistent. He refuses to do so. He repeatedly makes edits against the wishes of other editors, as evidenced by the reverts of his edits that persons other than me have made. What additional justification do you need? Warning him does no good because he uses an IP account once, never to return to it again. I highly doubt he has seen any of your warnings. If your decision is final, please let me know so I can seek a second opinion. Thanks. Tennis expert (talk) 06:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

There's no question that this IP user is a sock puppet of Jeffreyneave. He often signs his discussion page posts manually with "jeffreyneave" while using an IP account that's also used for disruption and incivility on the Rod Laver article. Really, what good would a block do? He no longer uses the Jeffreyneave registered account, instead using rolling IP accounts. He posts only to a few articles, with the Rod Laver account being his most common outlet. Semi-protection of that article seems reasonable to me and most likely to protect Wikipedia. But that's only my opinion, I suppose. Tennis expert (talk) 07:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Tennis expert (talk) 07:42, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Another Problem

Hello! I hate to keep coming back to you under these circumstances, but it would appear that we have another Wikipedia user who refuses to accept factual information. Please review the edits for Charmed36, in particular his recent edits to the genres of the Rihanna songs Shut Up and Drive and Unfaithful (song). The user refuses to recognize that those records do have an R&B influence to them (particularly in the instance of Shut Up and Drive, as it picked up a People's Choice Awards win in 2007 for "Best R&B Song") and has removed - several times - an R&B tag from the articles pertaining to those songs. I have explained on his talk page (see #68 - I think - in his index, labeled Shut Up and Drive) why the R&B tags should remain, but I don't believe he accepts the reasoning. Your assistance is much appreciated! Thank you so much. --InDeBiz1 (talk) 04:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I also wanted to bring the Hancock Stadium article to your attention again. The previous user has returned, insisting on adding the information that I have removed. This time, in his edit summary, he made what I take as a personal attack against me. I have reverted the edit and calmly explained on his talk page about the need for a verifiable source in order to meet NPOV guidelines. I also referenced him (for the second time) to WP:PROVEIT, but I'm afraid further steps may need to be taken to clear up this issue. However, since I am not an Administrator, I will leave that to you and others to decide. Thanks.--InDeBiz1 (talk) 23:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Mach3moe has gone too far. He has just accused me of vandalism in his edit summary of his most recent edit to Hancock Stadium, which I have reverted. It does not appear that he has read your comment on his talk page or - if he has - he is choosing to ignore it. What do you recommend as my next step? I hate to ask for mediation because it would be a glaring waste of any reviewer's time, as it's painfully apparent that my refusal to allow that particular information into the article is correct under WP:NPOV. --InDeBiz1 (talk) 05:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your assistance. I hate to make such a big deal out of this, but if that information is allowed to remain in the article, it could potentially cause many problems, not the least of which could (although unlikely, yes) a slander suit. The only thing that I worry about now is the chance that I may be exposed to an edit warring block, which would certainly not be indicative of the way that I contribute to the encyclopedia and I'm sure it would not be looked at in a great light when the time comes for me to pursue Administrator status, which I would like to attempt sometime in the future, perhaps this summer.  :( --InDeBiz1 (talk) 05:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Little requests

Hi, nice to meet you!

I need your helps. Could you make some Redirected pages to Buddhism by country such as:

• East Asian religions by country
• Chinese religions by country
• Taoism by country
• Confucianism by country

Because as you can see in the introdution of Buddhism by country that wrote:

"...Obtaining exact numbers of practicing Buddhists can be difficult and may be reliant on the definition used. Adherents of Eastern religions such as Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, Shinto and traditional religions or Shamanism, animism often have beliefs comprised of a mix of religious ideas..."

Thank you so much!

Good luck!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 04:54, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Angelo, while these ideologies are extremely linked, they are not the same thing. Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 06:36, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Dude!

That's a Cabal

Cheers for fixing my shiz, I'd hire you if I could afford to keep you. Yeah! Join up - I'll put you straight though. Total wiki-domination plus a free pair of slippers. Stay Frosty! Dfrg_msc 08:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

- TRANSMISSION ENDS -

: )

hey, like ur pic : P ElisaEXPLOSiONtalk. 18:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Just a Question

Hello, Master of Puppets. Is that true an admin can be blocked? I saw your msg in Prodego talk page, so is that true? Or you was just kidding!!!! See yah.....--Muddyb Blast Producer (talk) 14:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

It's quite interesting. However, it's terrible but that is the way both of you doing. I like that. Nice to hera that, Cheers, --Muddyb Blast Producer (talk) 15:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Help in renovating userpage

Sorry to disturb you! but i am finding difficulties in aligning boxes on my user page. Don't know how to fix this! Can you help me? --SMS ^Talk 19:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.

Thank you for your help. Unblocking should be a simple idea. Checkuser proven, edits are not vandalism. But I am scared that a few in wikipedia will say that checkuser can prove guilt and if it proves innocence, you are still guilty. Wild theories about syntax and ignoring when syntax is different. Anyway, thanks! In the previous months, I saw many things to correct or to edit but my mind is blank now! Oprahwasontv (talk) 22:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

My problem

Every since you blocked me I have been more inclined to edit war. I really think you made a big mistake when you blocked me when I didn't even break 3RR. But its too late to fix that. An apology would be nice though.--STX 01:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: Content disputes and other things

I think I did. But most people always think they're right. So I don't care about it anymore. Charmed36 (talk) 03:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

It isn't a question of "thinking" that I'm right and that's what I'm trying to get you to see. In the case of Shut Up and Drive, it won a recognized award as an R&B song, therefore an R&B tag - in addition to the Pop - is appropriate. In the case of Unfaithful (song), that song not only is obviously influenced by the Urban/R&B genre (listen to the chords and the beat, separately if you can find the instrumental online), but it also charted very highly on the Rhythmic Top 40 and - unless I'm mistaken, and I could be on this one - it also charted at Urban and Urban Adult Contemporary. Therefore, again, the R&B tag - in addition to the Pop - is appropriate. --InDeBiz1 (talk) 03:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

RE:LOL

[1] Hahahahaha, yeah I meant {{RFPP|do}} not {{RFPP|d}}, and yes that would be downright hilarious, like saying "Your request was so bad that two admins will not do it!!!" lol. When I saw that, I literally smacked myself in the forehead, jeez its been a long day. Haha « Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 06:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Haha, yeah poor Will, lol. And dont worry, I stole the TOC overflow from someone first lol. It helps out a lot, and it looks good! Have a good night! « Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 06:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Collective_punishment

Just so I know since you seem to be knowledgeable; how long should a request for comment usually last? Consensus seems pretty solid though few editors have shown up.

Also, user:Eleland still hasn't responded to the quantitative edit questions I had (one section above the rfc); I'm worried this could blow up again when I move the section to its new home. Any recommended steps to avoid this?

Thanks for the help, M1rth (talk) 00:23, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Doublevision

My system screwed up, and I double posted, not realizing that it had actually worked the first time. I tried repeatedly to self-revert, but I kept getting edit conflicts with some jackass who was going on about adoption or some such nonsense. Anyway, I'm off to go do battle with the Hooded Fang now, if you'll excuse me. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 01:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Reptoid Alien

Hey, this has been tagged for a while now and i see you are active. Would you mind turning it into a red link? :P Thanks, Tiptoety ^talk 01:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Tiptoety ^talk 01:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Its back........ Tiptoety ^talk 01:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Someone else got it, thanks. Tiptoety ^talk 01:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Adoption 22,000,000

I've finally got my 5000th edit. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 01:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

How long ago did you get your 5000th edit? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 02:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 02:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand sandboxes. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 23:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Where did you get the filefolders again? I've been asked about that. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} 00:09, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I have got a suggestion for your page. A logo, like Max and I have. I think CBL could make you a pretty cool one. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 02:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

There has been something that I have been very ashamed of for quite a while: [2] [3] [4] [5] --- There it is... I've spilled my guts. Does this mean I'm bad? Riana and I have patched things up, and Ryan isn't at all bitter at me, as I... well, I guess I would've been with him if we had been switched. Well anyway, I'm going to go and cry now. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 03:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

It seems that everyone is looking to change something in/on their page(s). Do you have any suggestions for my pages? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 21:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, Special:Contributions/92.13.74.61 vandalized Richard Moat. I reverted his edit. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 21:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Next time I catch a vandal, after I revert the edit, what should I do? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 21:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 21:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Would you look at User:Basketball110/Sandbox#3 and tell me what you think? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 23:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

The template is now at WP:WikiProject French communes. I created the userbox as well. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 01:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Could you watch over User:A little mollusk? He's having a bit of trouble with a group of nasty editors, who take speedy tags off of pages. I'll be out for a while, and I'm not sure what'll happen to him. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 19:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Around Wikipedia, I've noticed some "clubs." Groups of Wikipedians that share the same interests, and help these articles while getting to know the other users in the group (these are very few, though). What are Wikipedia's "rules" (I doubt WP has "rules" on this) on this? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 05:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD:List of ERP Vendors

You closed this with a consensus of keep. Can you please summarize the reasoning? I'm trying to understand why this result was keep, yet a nearly identical article "List of CEP Vendors" result was delete. There's an inconsistency there that needs to be resolved. Perhaps a relatively new pair of eyes (yours) on this topic can shed some light. Thanks. Bardcom (talk) 11:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I want to hear your opinions!

Dear Master of Puppets!

First, I want to thanks for your helps. So now, in Religion in China has had controversies between me and Saimdusan (strong anti-Buddhism and Chinese religions). Please give us your opinions and let people know more about the truth of Asian culture. It's really needed!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Religion_in_China#The_heavy_influence_of_Buddhism_-_Chinese_religions_among_various_East_Asian_civilizations

Thank you so much!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 12:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, I know! But I still appreciate your contributions! Thanks for your helps! Good luck!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 00:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Staine (band)

The hoax page Staine is back, now as Staine (band), and the person creating it has also made a personal attack against User:Slakr. Tb (talk) 20:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Bill Jaaska

Withing seconds of my creation of this entry, it was speedily deleted. (I did not even have time to add the hang-on template, as I was advised to do on my talk page.) I recreated the page with the hang-on tag and it was immediately deleted with no discussion as I was creating the related talk page. That level of deletion dos not seem appropriate to me. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 21:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

You should give people more than just seconds to respond before deleting. Especially the second time when I added a "hang on" template which is specifically supposed to at least briefly halt such a speedy deletion. How can anyone fix an article if it keeps getting deleted as they are editing it. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 21:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Maria Cristina Giongo

Is Maria Cristina Giongo notable? I'm not sure. -WarthogDemon 21:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Indeed that's true, though the fact that the same username started each page makes me raise an eyebrow. :P -WarthogDemon 23:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		Here's a barnstar for improving Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! The Helpful One (Review) 22:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Two-Mile Prairie, Missouri

Hi. :) I noticed that you had marked this one for relisting and removed it from its original day, but you hadn't transcluded it to today. Since it had been about 15 minutes, I presume this was an oversight and transcluded it for you. I thought I'd drop you a note in case you have a system or are keeping notes about stuff to transclude, so that I don't mess you up. :) (It's so good to see this backlog disappearing! Wow, did we ever get behind!) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :) I live in terror of forgetting or failing to remove the little "remove this when closing this AfD tag". So far as I know, I haven't yet, but it's inevitable. :/ One note that you might find helpful: there is a special procedure to follow when you close an AfD as merge. We place the template {{Afd-mergeto}} on the subject article and {{Afd-mergefrom}} on the destination talk page. Why the talk page? I don't know. I find this highly mysterious, since it differs from Help:Merge, but who am I to question? Anyway, full usage looks like this:{{afd-mergeto|destination article|debate name (sans Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/...so, in other words, usually nominated article name)|debate closure date}} and {{afd-mergefrom|nominated article|debate name|debate closure date}}. I've only recently realized that this templates exist myself. (I'm sure I read them some time ago at WP:DPR, but I don't do a lot of AfD and utterly forgot.) Until recently, I thought if I closed an article as merge, I had to merge it myself. I often do anyway, but at least now I know what to do when I can't (hit two of those today). :) I figure that you may not know this because of your handling of Another One Bites the Dust (1998 song). And, no, I'm honestly not stalking you. :D Just, like you, I've been working that backlog of AfDs. As a result, I've wound up contributing to many that are left and watchlisting them. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:40, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Happy to creep you out help! :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:47, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, MoP

Midorihana^~iidesune? has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Haven't see you around in a while. :) If I may ask, how was RfA for you, was it stressful? Midorihana^~iidesune? 06:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

We need more optimism on Wikipedia. :) Midorihana^~iidesune? 02:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD: R. J. Danvers

You closed the R. J. Davners AfD as keep, but I fail to see how this person meets either the general WP:BIO or the WP:PORNBIO criteria. The votes to keep don't clarify this situation. The subject of the article voted to keep based on appearing in one issue of a magazine and based on the claim that he stared in the groundbreaking film Grunts. As someone else mentioned in the AfD, the sources provided did not support either that he was a star of the flim or that it was groundbreaking. The other two just stated that he meets the criteria without any details. Could you help me understand what criteria were met and how they were met? BlueAzure (talk) 19:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:Guide to deletion states that you as the closing admin should "carefully read the AFD discussion, weigh all the facts, evidence and arguments". I don't see the evidence that supports the keep votes in this case. Again I will ask, what criteria were met and how were they met? BlueAzure (talk) 20:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The guideline says "starring in", not particapting in. If there were reliable sources that stated that he starred in the film, the subject of the article should have been able to provide those. Per Wikipedia:Verifiability, the burden of evidence is on the person who adds material. By your reasoning, anyone who was mentioned as particiapting in the film would pass WP:PORNBIO, unless evidence could be provided that they did not star in it. BlueAzure (talk) 23:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

your signature is dying...

Just letting you know that in your signature, on Firefox, the smiley face is kinda fuzzy in some spots on the line around the face. flaminglawyer^c 02:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

1. Nice idea. Maybe putting the smiley outside of the </nowiki></nowiki> would make it display better. 2. Sorry, that wasn't meant as an insult (if you weren't being sarcastic). 3. Nice theme for your talk page. flaminglawyer^c 02:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

haha i messed up ur formatting

File:Pie.jpeg

flaminglawyer^c has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of pies by adding {{subst:GivePie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

dang it

I never actually can seem to break the <div>'s on people's fancy userpages... darn. flaminglawyer^c 02:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

PS

Is your username derived from... a Metallica song? flaminglawyer^c 02:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes the smiley looks better

and i meant to put the <tt 's outside of the <tt><nowiki> blah blah blah </nowiki>

flaminglawyer^c 02:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

nope

I'm neither on fire nor a lawyer. But: think about it. If I had a personal logo, what would it look like? (hey, that gives me an idea...) flaminglawyer^c 02:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey

Hey, how is everything going? I am not very active on weekends, most of my editing is through the weekdays. Anyway, do you know of any way it would be possible for me to view Wikipedia's LocalSettings.php? I am trying to create a copy of the English Wikipedia's user rights settings. Thanks. Cheers. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 03:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I am usually gone on weekends, so I even get less than 30. But I do get most of the week, so I shouldn't be complaining. Anyway, I wish that there was a copy stored somewhere for people's reference. I am very interested in the MediaWiki software and want to learn about it's workings and how a wiki is operated. So I am, (don't laugh), creating an imaginary wiki with it's own settings and everything. Sounds stupid, I know. Thanks anyway. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 03:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

A Wiki that already has the software installed? By the way: I don't know why I am asking this, but are you a fan of Star Wars? Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 03:55, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I believe. Anyway, do you mind if I ask you a few questions about Star Wars? (I am a Star Wars addict) Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 04:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Interrupting and pulling this back on topic. Responded on MP's (you are MoP puppets) talk. Prodego ^talk 05:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

(going on another topic)Oh, questions like who's your favorite character, favorite movie, etc. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 14:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Who is your favorite character? Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 04:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I haven't played the games much (I do know a lot about the expanded universe though), Darth Sidious (Palpatine) definitely in the movies, and everything else for that matter. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 04:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and I suppose my favorite film is Revenge of the Sith. (because Darth Sidious finally gets to do some action in this film is one reason, and don't even get me started on the Mace vs. Sidious fight). Anyway, I am heading off to bed in a little while. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 05:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello Buddy Ol Pal

Hello friend of mine. I noticed that you put a lock on something I wanted to update (J.R. Niklos) I wish you would have checked the article before you locked it because it is historically off. I understands though, you are human, and humans make mistakes. Please either take the time to fix this profile, or unlock it so that others may fix it. You are my friend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JackKnowsJack (talk • contribs) 05:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

My page!

Hey thanks for asking! Um rectangular boxes please, MidnightBlue border and maybe Black filler?If not then Gray and DarkGray works! Sorry I couldn't get back with you sooner, real life...lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by Letter 7 (talk • contribs) 13:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of J. Hayden

Hello I am the CEO of J World Records,LLC. I would like to list a Biography on our Featured Artist J. Hayden. Can you please give me specifics on why you deleted this page so that we may resolve this issue?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jworldrecords (talk • contribs) 14:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Photoshop pic

I've been waiting for months for you to finish it. the lightsaber one Wikidude57 Pika! 23:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:My Page!

Thanks mate! Much appreciated! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Letter 7 (talk • contribs) 23:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Once more, adoption

What is the difference between a cabal and one of those groups, or are they the same? Also, I've piled up 6000 edits. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 02:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Is there a list of cabals? Or is there an estimate of about how many WP has? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 04:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I found it: WP:SCREW. Interesting shortcut. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 04:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

You must already be an admin to become a bureaucrat, correct? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 05:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The "welcomeg" template that you signed on User talk:Dabombnow... how do I get it to sign. When ever I just put that welcome on a users talk page, it shows ~~~~ instead of Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 23:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC). Why does it do this, and how do I fix it? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 23:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 23:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

If I were to, how would I start a meetup? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 00:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

On the template, for the link "leave me a message," it links here. How do I fix that? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 04:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. What is the page for uploading a picture onto Wikipedia? I found it once, but now I just can't seem to. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 04:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with Wikipedia, but I'm covered in about 5 inches of snow. How is the weather in Canada? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 21:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow! That's cold. Anyway, I have a question: how do I change the font of my signature? I've seen many users do that. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 23:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll see what I can do. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 00:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Would the code be something like this: <font face="Arial" color="#00BFFF"> , or what? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 00:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you seen this yet? Basketball110 _{will you sign?} ♣ 00:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Decision Intelligence deletion

Hello,

I got the "spam - speedy deletion" notice when I was editting this page.

And so I put in the discussion page why I added it - but before I could even finish my discussion edit you had deleted it (even though I put the "hold on" tag on the page).

I had also deleted the product refereces out of the main page, since I thought that might be what you didn't like (and they didn't really fit the tone of wikipedia - I was looking to get more content in on my first edit). But I don't think that even made it before your deletion.

Other then the fact that I haven't added many pages of text, this article is at least as relevent as the one on SAS institute or the direct marketing association or other companies that do these complicated backroom analytics to try and target consumers. And I'm sure it would be expanded on in the future (I certainly am trying to find out more, since I know folks are interested. (after reading the really interesting Twin Cities Business article I had linked at the bottom on how these analitics people can figure out everthing about you) - Could you either reinstate the page and allow me to address any problems in discussion or in the main article...or could you tell me what content you require to bring it back...?

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dranalyst (talk • contribs) 06:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Frank Bell

MoP! Hi there :) I was wondering if you could help me with the page I created. The artist has gotten international exposure, being on both the front pages of youtube.com and google.com in the same vein as Esmee Denters, and soulja boy. What did I forget to add? Thanks! :)

A BIG thanks!

Hey I just want to give you a big thank you for taking care of that vandal [6], and deleting that page that the creator kept taking my Afd template off of. Gwandoya ^Talk 06:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

A favor

Could you do me a favor and fix the cut and paste move of Peter Maivia Jr to Peter Maivia, Jr.? I'm asking directly cause not controversial, it's obvious that's where it should be, according to WP:NCP. It's just requests at WP:SPLICE tend to take awhile. I asked Luna, but they seemed to have disappeared right after I asked. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 07:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I guess I'll let WP:RM handle it now. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 07:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Padlocks

Whilst I can't deny that there's something nice about the subtle-understatedness of the small padlock, I chose the big one on purpose - to send a message to all those unautoconfirmed vandals out there that they can't mess with Oprah! ;-) _{The public face of GB}^T/C 09:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Aaah, stealth. Hadn't considered that as an approach - subtlety was never my strong point! _{The public face of GB}^T/C 14:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Mainpage

Thats ok, it was added as part of a WP:ERRORS request. I agree that the wording was not strong but a FARC commander makes it sound like he was the commander, ie. Commander in Chief and not just a rank. Perhaps ...killing Raul Reyes, a FARC commander, and triggering a diplomatic crisis with Ecuador and Venezuela. Regards Woody (talk) 15:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Referee Needed

Please step in and admin at Justin Chadwick, please. The contributor is being unreasonable.

Same User, Two Names

I noticed the following user just now: The4532. If you were to review the user and talk pages of that user and The4325, it would appear that they are one and the same individual. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but that is a violation of Wikipedia policy, isn't it? --InDeBiz1 (talk) 23:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for R. J. Danvers

An editor has asked for a deletion review of R. J. Danvers. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. BlueAzure (talk) 01:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

3RR Report

• Hey, thanks for fixing my report. I was wondering why no admins were looking at the report :( Steve Crossin (talk) 14:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

• Ahh, now I realise the error I made....I think. I was supposed to go into their contributions list and get the diffs from there? Oh well. I'll know better next time. Is it OK if I revert the page to the first edit before they made? Only because each edit another user made, they undid. So going back to the version before they edited (they started that account today, i suspect a sock puppet, but can't prove it) would restore the article to its previous state. Is this OK? Steve Crossin (talk) 14:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

• • Just reverted vandalism on your userpage. Seems admins get vandalised more often than others. Well, I'm looking out for you :) It's thanks for helping me :) Steve Crossin (talk) 14:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

rollback goodness

no probs.

I just love the way that the recent changes now shows the auto-generated edit summary "blanked the page". It makes RC Patrol almost like being a policeman with a radar-gun, just waiting for people to come past and announce themselves as breaking the rules. :-) Witty Lama 14:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Just a little something...

		The Original Barnstar
		MoP, just a little note to say that I think you're doing a top job with your new buttons. Since your RfA passed, you've went from strength to strength with the Administrator duties, whilst all the time maintaining your old, fun-loving attitude. Don't ever let it go, and keep up the great work! Best of regards, AGK (contact) 20:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow

Wow. --EoL talk 01:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks alot!

Thanks so much for designing it for me! I really appreciate it! Kudos- Letter 7/Caleb (talk) 01:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

And for your help...

		The Special Barnstar
		Thanks a ton for helping a new user like me! If only we could convert the vandals into people like you! Kudos Letter 7/Caleb (talk) 01:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

thank u

thanks for your responseHenslee57 (talk) 04:25, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

thanks kindly

...for setting me on the right path wrt the paul tillich article. much appreciated. Anastrophe (talk) 06:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Qxz ads

Hi, MOP. You are doing a fantastic job with the Wikipedia ads. However, could you please include the images that you used to make the ads, per GFDL? One example is seen here. Also, on this image, you didn't provide a license or image description, which is vital, because as you know there is a period where images are deleted after a certain period of time if they don't have licenses.

Also, Spanish Wikipedia (see this) is considering having ads on their userpages. If you are interested, you might want to go to #wikipedia-es (don't worry, they speak English in there and don't bite :-P) to ask them. Cheers. miranda 09:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

International Quality and Productivity Center

Hi, you declined the db-spam nomination for this one, asserting notability. I still think it should be deleted as advertising. Do you plan to re-write it? If not, I will probably list it on AfD. thanks, Nomoskedasticity (talk) 10:41, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

International Quality and Productivity Center is the one. I'm happy with the assertion that it's notable, but as it stands it really is just an ad. thanks! Nomoskedasticity (talk) 14:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

For helping out here [7]. Best wishes, JNW (talk) 17:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

A second opinion

I know you're a busy guy, but when you get some free time, could you take a look at a page I created? It's the first page I've genuinely created on my own, and I want to make sure it looks alright. (Note that I also added it to the disambiguation page for "Subsonic") Thanks for the help. --Ean5533 ( View! / Talk!) 19:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding WP:Notability -- Interesting point. How does one assess notability for software? It's pretty obvious to me how to measure notability for a person, for example, but I can't think of a good metric for software. Number of users? Perhaps already-notable people/companies that use the software?

I look at a page like Banshee (music player) and I get confused. Clearly Banshee is a notable piece of software, as thousands of people use it (including myself). However, the article for Banshee does not really establish notability for itself. Any advice on the matter? --Ean5533 ( View! / Talk!) 01:54, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Your recent Wikipedia Ad

Hi, I was reviewing the Wikipedia Ads you just put up. Nice work! Just one question though on Image:Qxz-ad124.gif - is that AIM buddy a copyrighted logo? From the looks of it, it looks like an AIM buddy knock-off, but I was just wondering if it still technically violates (C) on AOL's logo. Also, I'm pretty sure you need to cite every image/logo you used for your ads. Perhaps listing the image sources on the image summary would be ideal for others to review potential (C) issues in the future. Thanks! Please let me know if you have questions. Have a great day! :D - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 23:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

retrieve article

i would like to retrieve an article that i submitted in March 2007 called "Canadian Company of Pilgrims". it has been deleted and i would like to get a copy of it.

it was deleted by FisherQueen on July 9, 2007 over notability concerns.

i would like to re-submit the article minus the image that caused it to be deleted.

i understand that any administrator can undelete the article and restore it to my user space.

thanks for any help that anyone can provide,

--DP (talk) 22:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

The image had nothing to do with the article being deleted, it seems the subject did not meet our notability criteria at the time, if you think this has changed, please make the case for the article at deletion review. Nick (talk) 23:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

can i not get a copy of the article anyway? --DP (talk) 23:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I can create a copy for you at User:Snuggims/Canadian Company of Pilgrims, if you'd like. Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 00:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

yes thank you, i'd appreciate that very much.

--DP (talk) 01:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

thank you thank you!!!! i got it. --DP (talk) 01:43, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Irvine, California

Your reply at WP:RPP came out bad. I put a note attempting to explain it, but I used Spivak and now people are going to be 10x more confused. Oh well, it's not like there's no protection log. People can figure it out if they care. --Thinboy00 @149, i.e. 02:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Problem with signature (solved!)

Hi Master of Puppets:

I fixed my sigature now; really I commited a mistake when I was creating her, but is all ok now! :-) See here my signature, and if you see any problem with her, just talk to me and I'll fix then! Thanks for the advice. (sorry for my lateness in the answer, but I was very busy in real life, what let me out from wikipedia for a while! ,( , but is ok now!). --Cold Phoenix _T/C\M 03:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Could you please explain more fully?

You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abu Mohammed as delete.

But you didn't explain how you came to the conclusion. I thought some strong arguments had been made for redirect.

I would really appreciate it if you took the time to explain your reasoning. Geo Swan (talk) 04:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I got your answer -- such as it was.

I strongly disagree that we don't know who he was. We know he was a Guantanamo captive.

As I said in the discussion, there are several good candidates for where this article redirected.

You seem to be suggesting that I should start a brand new version of this article with whatever article I think this should be redirected to. You sem to be overlooking that this means that when we have more information about this individual, no ordinary user can revert the redirection to incorporate the existing material with that new material.

When I participate in RFAs I ask every candidate whether they think they have the patience and humility to consider the possibility that the occasional judgment they make could be in error. I am very sorry to report that a distressingly large minority of the existing cohort of administrators don't seem willing to consider the possibility they made a mistake. I am very sorry to report that a distressingly large minority of the existing cohort of administrators seem to regard any question about their judgment calls as some kind of personal attack, no matter how tactfully those questions are phrased.

I looked at your recent closing history. You didn't offer your reasoning in any of your recent closures. Let me ask you to reconsider closing {{afd}}s if you don't have the time or patience to offer an explanation or your reasoning. If I am not mistaken one of the wikipedia's goals is for its decision making to be open and transparent. Do you really think that closing {{afd}}s without explanation complies with that goal?

You might think that you don't need to offer explanations when you think the explanation is "obvious". Sorry, nothing is obvious.

Specifically, about this article, I am going to suggest you consider restoring its edit history, and redirecting it to Guantanamo captives missing from the official list. Geo Swan (talk) 09:41, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I got your latest reply.

You wrote that closing admins "follow consensus", except when it it close? But it is not a vote, correct? Isn't it part of the closing admin's obligation to make a judgment call about the opinions expressed by participants? If a participant expresses an opinion that is counter to policy, isn't the closing admin supposed to discount it?

And, similarly, if a participant expresses an opinion that shows they are uninformed, it is my impression that the closing admin has the authority to discount those, as well. I pointed out that "Abu X" is not a name. It is a nickname, meaning "Father of X". Other participants in the discussion didn't take that into account. I think this is important. I think your authority includes discounting opinions that don't take important information into account. IMO the nature of "Abu X" is an example of that kind of important information. I was disappointed, remain disappointed, that you haven't addressed this point.

No offense, but it seems to me that not when an administrator doesn't take the time to explain their closing decisions, when they announce their decision in the {{afd}} -- that is a mistake -- always. First, nothing is obvious; Second, those on the losing side of a debate may be newbies -- they deserve an opportunity to educate themselves, and stop being newbies -- the closing admins comments is part of their education; Third, those considering DRV deserve to know the reasoning, they might find the explanation convincing, and skip making the request for DRV.

You wrote: "...but the impression that I got was that we knew nothing aside from him being at Guantanamo and being a trial witness." That is incorrect. We don't know much. We know:

1. He was a Guantanamo captive;
2. Another Guantanamo captive requested his testimony;
3. Camp authorities were unwilling or unable to keep track of who he was.

Camp authorities's showed they were unwilling or unable to maintain an accurate, reliable prison roster. Camp authorities failed to accurately and reliably identify Abu Mohammed. I argued that, while this was not sufficient reason to create an article about him, it was important information that should not be lost through a deletion. I am disappointed you haven't addressed this point. I've suggested how I think this information should be addressed, and you have written: "...then as long as you have the evidence I'll recreate..." So, what kind of further evidence were you looking for? Geo Swan (talk) 18:48, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I got your last reply.

Your comment: "You're using the dicdef of consensus." -- Sorry, I don't know what you mean by this.

Sorry, I don't know what you mean by: "...the weight of rationale for delete being higher..."

Note: the first participant wrote: "Delete IMHO, Guantanamo detainee's aren't notable for inclusion into WP." Another particcipant wrote, in part: "Simply being a detainee at GB is not notable..." Aren't these just paraphrases of WP:IDONTLIKEIT? Aren't closing admins supposed to discount arguments that don't comply with the deletion policies, like these two?

I continue to think Abu Mohammed should be redirected to Guantanamo captives missing from the official list. You said you would need proof. I've asked you what kind of proof you were looking for. I don't want to waste my time or your time. Is there any point in asking you, again, what kind of proof you had in mind? Geo Swan (talk) 04:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I have taken a few days to respond to your latest -- I found elements of it very disturbing.

One aspect that is disturbing about this is that you are not a regular wikipedian, you are an administrator. You've agreed that, in future, you will make more of an effort to explain the reasoning behind your rulings. I was glade to read that. However you seem to have reserved for yourself the right to not explain your reasoning -- when you think the reason is "obvious". The remaining disturbing aspect of this is that nothing is obvious. Please read my parable nothing is obvious.

Another aspect I find disturbing is that you seem to be prepared to base your closing decision on what seems to be nothing more than an undiscussed -- possibly unexamined -- POV. You wrote:

Second point; I don't believe those were IDONTLIKEITs, but rather sound. I agree that not every Guantanamo captive doesn't deserve his own article; not because I'm against those articles, just because being an inmate there is not automatic proof of notability.

There are people who hold this POV. Please recognize, this is merely a POV. An alarming fraction of those holding this view are highly partisan POV-pushers, who will descend to personal attacks, wikistalking, and highly deceitful wikilawyering.

AGF. Just because some who hold this view are willing to descend to vandalism to get their way doesn't mean every person holding this view is a vandal. I invite those who hold this view to engage in a dialogue. Some who hold this POV are unwilling or unable to respond on an intellectual level -- and respond with vandalism and deceit. Others, when they have responded, have turned out to have reached their POV based on misconceptions -- misconceptions like: "GWOT captives aren't really different than any other POW..."; or "GWOT captives aren't really different from ordinary convicts". It is official Bush Presidency policy that the captives aren't POWs. And Guantanamo does not contain any "convicts".

I saved a dialogue: User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Guantanamo captives aren't felons and aren't POWs.

Let me be frank. It has been my experience that a minority of the administrators I have interacted with have fallen short of the standards I believe the rest of us have a right to expect of them. Several administrators have left veiled threats on my talk page, that were not based on policy.

On September 23 2005 I encountered {{afd}} for the first time. I started articles on two Guantanamo captives on March 27 2005 -- Murat Kurnaz and Omar Khadr. Over the next six months I added two dozen further Guantanamo captives, when I came across mention of them in the press. In late September 2005 I came across a library of the unclassified dossiers of 57 captives, that had been published in response to their habeas corpus petitions. I thought it was rich material for basing articles. On September 23 2005 I started articles on four of these captives, and had them almost immediately nominated for deletion.

It was a very unpleasant experience. The regulars there used opaque jargon they were not prepared to explain. The regulars were, largely, unprepared to actually engage in civil discussion. One regular -- User:Zoe, asserted that articles on Guantanamo captives could serve no other purpose that "America-bashing" -- that they were "inherently POV".

I found this a puzzling comment, an insupportable one. AGF. I assumed she had mis-spoke. I addressed a civil request for clarification to her -- which she ignored. But, a few days she nominated another article I started, accusing me of WP:POINT, and bad faith.

I don't know if you know her history. About a year ago she had a high-profile dust-up in WP:AN/I. In my personal experience of her she could not consider or acknowledge the possibility of error. And it seemed to me that the unrelated dust-up in WP:AN/I circled around her inability to consider error -- and to regard every question as a personal attack.

I called Zoe's assertion -- that an entire topic could be "inherently POV", unsupportable. Topics cannot be POV themselves, only our coverage of them. I think any topic can be covered from a neutral point of view, if those writing it make enough effort.

I've made that effort. The material I contribute gets very few challenges over POV. And, those challenges seem to be largely based either on their misconceptions, or based, I am sorry to say, on my correspondent's partisanship. Have I ever lapsed in my 15,000 edits on these topic? Sure. And I fixed each one when it was brought to my attention. But, frankly, these lapses have been very rare.

I've spent thousands of hours working on the wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the "war on terror". I've worked hard to comply with policy. I think I have done a good job. I am concerned that those who initially tried to suppress coverage of this material on grounds of violation of WP:NPOV, continue to want to suppress coverage of this material, and all the efforts I spent to fully comply with policy have merely forced them to strain for other justifications for its suppression.

Please recognize -- "notability" is merely a guideline. IMO it is a flawed measure, one that has proven useless -- worse than useless -- for controversial topics. Some of my correspondents have attempted to explain why they think individual captive's article aren't "notable". Frankly, after reading those attempted explanations it seems to me that the more willing my correspondents were to accept the assertions of Bush Presidency spin-doctors at face value the more willing they were to call other material "non-notable".

Note: No one argued that Abu Mohammaed merited an article. I continue to think that you erred in deleting, instead of redirecting, which loses the edit history for anyone who come across sufficient new information to merit expanding the article to full article status. It also complicates using the article's previously existing references in other related articles. Geo Swan (talk) 19:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Userpage

Thanks, I'm really going to have to start learning more wiki-code! Swirlface (talk) 08:31, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

PureCM

Hi, just kindly wanted to ask for the reason for deleting the PureCM page. I had a look at other pages from the Revision control comparison and could not see a big difference. It would be nice if you could tell me what should be changed to stay published. Thanks a lot! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ksu mcr (talk • contribs) 12:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

==ForeverFreeSpeech (talk · contribs)==

Since you were involved in this, I would like to point you to this diff. I am requesting Jersyko modify his actions, as he is only making worse a situation already caused to be bad by a large amount of WP:BITE-style behavior.

I would prefer that the abusing of newbies stop, but this looks like a textbook case; a user being continually pushed and harassed (feeling as if they are being stalked, which appears to be the case from at least one person's series of edits following theirs on multiple pages) who is now being indef-blocked for "POV-Pushing" when the primary people infuriating them appear to be POV-pushers themselves. M1rth (talk) 17:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Adoption an admin

I'm an admin! Basketball110 18:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Correct me if I am wrong: being bold is updating pages, but not adding speculation. What about speculation: is it ever okay, I mean? Basketball110 06:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

What is the correct way to create a WikiProject? Some people submit it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals, but some just create it. Are both acceptable? Also, what did User:Willy on Wheels do? Basketball110 18:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

And "Cute 1 4 u" a sockpuppeteer? I noticed her (I assume it's a her, since Hilary Duff is "cast" as her) on the page User:Raul654/Wikipedia the Movie. Basketball110 20:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the Arkansas ad! You're great! Basketball110 23:31, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

File:Pie.jpeg

Basketball110 has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of pies by adding {{subst:GivePie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I thought you deserved this. The answer to you too, Basketball110 23:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Emily Dickinson quotes

Hi, I saw that you helped format the newly added "Quotes" section at Emily Dickinson. Just a note to say that I've removed it and have notified the user who originally added them. This is a newly promoted FA and random, large sections of quotes belong better at Wikiquote, which, since you're an administrator and everything, I hope you agree with. It's great to help with new users, and I admire the effort it takes, but perhaps you should check a little more carefully what you're helping them with first. :) Take care, María (habla conmigo) 05:01, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, Master of Puppets. You have new messages at Chetblong's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cascade protection of Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)

Any reason the protection of Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) is cascade protection? It seems to me that normal full-protection should be enough to prevent revert wars. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I remember protecting that page and I'm 100% sure that I can't remember using cascading protection. There's no need to. Sorry for any inconveniences this caused! Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 16:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Didn't cause any inconvenience, it's just that it looked wrong to me, and I believe that an admin usually should, before reverting an action of an other admin, attempt to contact him/her. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I have no idea how that happened. And thanks for checking! :) Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 16:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, old friend

I just noticed this. Thanks for that! Now, if you'd excuse me, I think I'd better go put some armor on.--MrFish^{Go Fish} 11:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Multiple Undos -- DST

It is not only simple but almost intuitive -- Edit the last good version before the bad versions and save it. I've been working much too long in systems that are not intuitive. I need to remember how to get back into the mind set that knows that all drafts are available. I think I know how to do that.

Thank you. ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by JimCubb (talk • contribs) 23:53, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, aren't you quick on helpme

User talk:MylesCallum is what I'm talking about :-).--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions|Guest)} 02:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Well no wonder why you were so quick!--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions|Guest)} 02:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, so I was off. Hey how do they find the user's edit count? Doesn't the Interoit's tool only go up to 40000?--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions|Guest)} 04:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

My request for bureaucratship

Dear XXX, thank you for taking part in my RfB. As you may know, it was not passed by bureaucrats.
I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your support, despite concerns cited by the opposition. Although RfA/B isn't really about a person, but more about the community, I was deeply touched and honoured by the outpouring of support and interest in the discussion. I can only hope that you don't feel your opinion was not considered enough - bureaucrats have to give everyone's thoughts weight.
I also hope that the results of this RfB lead to some change in the way we approach RfBs, and some thought about whether long-entrenched standards are a good thing in our growing and increasingly heterogenous community.
I was a little miserable after the results came out, so I'm going to spread the love via dancing hippos. As you do. :)
I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. If at any point you see something problematic in my actions, please do not hesitate to call me out. ~ Riana ⁂ 05:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, so, Master, Master, where's the dreams I've been after? :P ~ Riana ⁂ 05:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Archiving

May I suggest setting up your talk page to automatically be archived by MiszaBot III? Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 18:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I just suggested it because of how large your talk page becomes in a short amount of time. Although I like the manual method too. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 21:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Page protection?

Hi MoP, I'm not sure this page (link) needs protection. The editor Neights (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been edit warring to add irrelevant and marginal info to this and several related articles. S/he has been blocked indefinitely (See ANI thread and my comment here). Anyway, it's perfectly fine if you want to keep it protected, just not sure it's necessary at this point. Thanks, R. Baley (talk) 07:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Ha, nevermind [8], thanks, R. Baley (talk) 07:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

your 'decision'

Per my decision at the AN3 noticeboard, you are now only allowed to make two reversions to an article within a 24 hour period before having to stop. [...] Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 03:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

this is not what the 3rr board is for. If you want to impose special restrictions on editors, either take it to the arbcom, or try to get community consensus for it, at WP:AN/I. For such "special measure", it might be helpful to actually look at the case. We have too many admins acting from a position of "oh, I see people are reverting, let's just slap everyone on the wrist and move on". Master of Puppets, I have been active on Wikipedia for almost four years, an admin for over three, accumulating some 100k edits. I have seen many, many disputes. Believe me, I am familiar with policy, and if I say that Camptown is in blatant violation of policy, you should give me the benefit of doubt and at least spend five minutes looking at the case. The 3rr board is for handling straightforwadr 3rrvios, algorithmically. I am afraid any other admin decision will require the investment of some time and common sense. Now, as a bona fide uninvolved admin, I suggest you go back and review Campdown's behaviour wrt Kosovo in general (consistent trolling), and deal with him under WP:DISRUPT, and not according to some armchair revert-count. dab (𒁳) 13:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I've also been involved in this project for some time, and Dbachmann's arrogance even beats the low points of the Polish-Russian conflict I've observed from the sideline. Dbachmann is a coward who wont even resort to stirring up a campaign against other editors (see typical example). And, there is absolutely no reason to award the self-labled "bona fide uninvolved admin" Dbachmann the benifit of doubt. The last thing this project needs is an admin who so easily gets away by bending the rules to his favors. --Camptown (talk) 14:03, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I just urge you all see how bullish Dab has been with Assyrian-related pages. I mean, he moves a page to another name of Syrian Nestorians, when the title is unheard of (just 300 google hits [[9]] and not one of them talks about Syrian Nestorians in terms of modern content, which is what Dab declared without discussing.) And its not just that, his manner is making other discouraged from working here. Why the strong tone dab? Always accusing people of randum Wiki rules (as he did right now accusing Camptown of breaking 2) such as WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Take a look at his latest comments; [[10]] - Is this how a admin is to talk with other users? I feel so insulted, but powerless since this admin thinks he has some kind of ownership of pages. Everytime I challange a statement he makes, he refuses to reply but rather makes a mockery out of me (and others), with comments such as these; [[11]]. How can we work with a person like this? Let alone one who has greater authority? He single handedly creates guidelines [[12]] (a convention that the community hasn't even agreed apon) and uses it to win arguements [[13]]. How can one get away with this? Isn't there power-check on Wikipedia? Chaldean (talk) 14:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

see my talkpage for further comments of your "invoking 2RR". Fwiiw, Camptown is not only within WP:DISRUPT at this point, he is also straying into WP:NPA territory. Chaldean's "Assyrian" ceterum censeo (aka forum shopping) has zilch to do with any of this. dab (𒁳) 09:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

unprotect 9/11

Thank you for protecting 9/11 on Haemo's request. I am now requesting to release it again, since we have consensus to not continue this edit war.

• Special:Contributions/67.165.163.114
• pledge

Would you consider? Thx  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 00:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I only see another editor remarking; there were many more than that involved in the dispute. I'm reluctant to unprotect unless more people agree to stop edit warring. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 00:24, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Haemo sort of misrepresented the dispute. (Unintentionally, let's presume.) On March 3 there was a dispute over POV flags, leading to a 7-day lock. (Most editors seem to loose interest in the Talk page however, as long as the article is "safely locked", so little progress is made then.) This POV flag issue rekindled on March 10, but edit warring on that stopped. Then a new anon came with the Fahrenheit 9/11 issue, and unfortunately he did not take WP:3RR seriously, it seems. Without this anon there would have been no edit war, is my impression, but I must admit I did not scrutinize every edit. So, when you still need more editors pledging, please name them so I can contact them.
I have by the way asked help about the POV flag dispute, but had no response so far.  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 00:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I see Rx StrangeLove reverting you, Ice Cold Beer reverting you twice, and by MONGO here. There are more warring reversions, but those are just a few examples; I'd only unprotect if you could get an agreement from all the people who have been warring recently. Otherwise, I may unprotect and it'll start right up again. Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 00:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you seeking a promise not to violate 3RR, or a promise not to revert? The first seems unnecessary, because all of them are very experienced editors, and will not shame themselves by knowingly breaking that rule. The latter seems impossible to ask. So what is it you want pledged from whom exactly?  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 00:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to see consensus that nobody is going to edit war. I know that's asking for quite a bit, but if you could go to their pages and ask for them to post on the article's talk page that would be great. That way, you guys can (hopefully) reach a compromise and we'll get back to smooth editing. If you'd like, I can also request their presence... your choice. Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 00:59, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Since not all of them are assuming good faith on my part, it would be really great when you would ask them directly. It might seem awkward to them when I make such a request. OK?  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 01:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

• When you can offer me any advice on the matter I asked help about, please do!  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 01:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

hey, MoP, it's great they are replying at Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests. However, we need fresh blood in this discussion to see how to get out of it. Their solution for reaching consensus seems to be that I should keep my mouth shut. My question basically is: are my edits against policy? Or are they misinterpreting policy?  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 03:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

• On the lock: I would appreciate very much when you could ask them to stop reverting directly, without me having to do so, as party in the conflict. Or, you might unlock the site and see what happens, you can always lock it again?  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 03:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Master of Puppets, as long as you're willing to keep dropping in on the discussion, I'm willing to not edit the article. You could make edits in my stead when you think they are reasonable. The other editors are in my opinion coming a heavily biased editing position, while believing that is the neutral position, and believing they are upholding policy in doing so.
You don't need to read all 100.000 bytes of discussion; the last part is the most important part. The previous discussion is a lot of policy-linking which did not really stick. The current argument is: there are thousands of facts relating to 9/11, which do not all merit inclusion into the article. The only way to decide which go in and which don't, would be not to use your/our own common sense but see which facts are liked by the RS. And I can find no basis for that position in any guideline, nor have they quoted a sentence which made such a point. That's why we are deadlocked, that's why the same debates keep recurring, that's why edit conflicts arise. Can you help in any way?  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 04:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

If so, the best place to start would be either Talk:September_11,_2001_attacks#partial_issue:_Michael_Meacher or Talk:September_11,_2001_attacks#March_10_POV_tags_edit_war???  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 04:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

editing 9/11

You could go ahead and add it anywhere where relevant, though perhaps a new section would be advisable. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 04:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, the article is still protected? Secondly, I see no consensus, do you? How to proceed?  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 04:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I want us to work in harmony on that page, the fighting is tiresome, and the only product it yields is experience, not wikipedia-text. Do you see a way? (Never mind the insertion position, I guess).  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 04:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Add it to the talk page, I mean. Then, invite the other editors to look at it and tell you why they think it's wrong. That should be constructive. Remember, make sure you have reliable sources backing up everything. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 04:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

This is in fact already happening, however the complaints they have cannot be remedied but seem invalid to me: Talk:September_11,_2001_attacks#partial_issue:_Michael_Meacher  &#151; Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 04:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting the proposed edit. How do you feel about Sheffield's remarks?  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 01:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you; his text is indeed a good improvement to the section. It does not however make the fact that Meacher has voiced his concerns obsolete to the 9/11 article. I've asked editors where the minority view is expressed in the article, and none have named any sentence which does, which is a violation of NPOV in my book. I'll be in touch later, when others may have replied to us. Thx, MoP!  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 01:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Over here, MoP!

If someone vandalizes a page, how many times, normally, does that happen before an admin blocks them? What is the "number to go by" per say? Basketball110 03:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I actually ran into one user that made an entire page listing the reasons he loves vandalizing Wikipedia. I'll keep that bit in mind, when I meet someone like that again. Just wondering, how many edits do you have? My computer and I can't seem to access the edit count button. Basketball110 03:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, he created a page like Romania, not like User:Basketball110/Vandal. It was in mainspace. Basketball110 04:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I've got to check that. I think that may rank among the top 100. But then again, it's quality not quantity. But if you are a WikiManiac (not that you are, unless you want to be one) and you are on top of that list, I'm sure that user has plenty of both. Basketball110 04:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

You're right. I got 10,000 and 100,000 mixed up. Stupid me. You are, or were a minute ago, #1530, with 12,500 edits of currently existing pages. Cool! Basketball110 04:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

When a user gets blocked, and the discussion ends, and the user gets an indef block, is there anyway of calling a sort of "referendum" of that discussion, and giving evidence for that user? Basketball110 04:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Is repeated canvassing grounds for a block? Basketball110 00:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

deleting PayPay article

I absolutely disagree with deleting above stated article PayPay. There was no advertising text and i was just commonly describing a payment system similar to moneybookers or paypal. The text was roughly identic with these 2 articles so there was no reason for deleting that article. If it would be advertising you would have to delete also paypal and moneybookers articles because there is no difference regarding contents at all!! Waiting for reasonable explanation. Thank you

--AndreYoung (talk) 10:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Notification of an attack made on you

The vandal that got your user page posted an attack on you on its talk page that I removed. here. Enigma ^msg! 16:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Needless chit chat

How's the weather been in Manitoba? Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 01:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thats good. Though I personally love the cold, I would love to visit Canada and Alaska one day. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 01:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I found this and this funny. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 01:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)