User talk:Philippe/Archive

Brice Carrington

I'm not quite sure why you persisted in deleting the Brice Carrington page while I was writing my defense, despite the fact that I had posted a holdon tag, as specified in Wikipedia policy. Seems like you could have waiting five minutes for me to finish typing. Regardless, my argument was thus:

This page has been flagged for speedy deletion as an "attack" page. The reason that I feel this is not an attack page is because the evidence can be independently verified. He has been quoted in major publications as a sound designer for films. Credits for these films can be independently verified. Since he has been able to pose as a an impostor on a public stage, this article provides evidence that can hopefully be used by future journalists in order to verify his authenticity. I think this is important, but if it's deemed an attack, I will certainly understand. Anyway, it would seem that you're going to keep deleting it, regardless of whether or not it is factual, so I'll just stop posting. --Omeomi 20:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't delete it. I did, however, tag it as an attack page. I felt (and still feel) that it was outside the realm of appropriate biographies for living people. If you can provide third party sources that exhibit a neutral point of view, the issue can be re-evaluated, but as it is, I agree with the administrator's decision to delete the page. Philippe Beaudette 20:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Brice Cariington had no involvement in the films "Fantastiv Four" and "Spiderman". this is verifieble by contacting the Post Production sound departments at 20th Century Fox, And Sony Pictures Entertainment. I have personal spoken with him regarding his claims, and he denied making them, saying that he makes sound which sound similar to sounds used in the films he speaks of- He also said that the autors of the articles who cited his claims spoke in error, yet no attempt has been made to correct the errors. His latest interview from 17, Feruary 2007 is as follows-

_{<removed copyright violation> Philippe Beaudette 00:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)}

charles maynes

Mihotoke Issa

This is a character page from an anime that you are trying to delete.

Misys Healthcare Systems

Would like clarification as to why the Misys Healthcare System entry is flagged as "advertising" when it is nearly a duplicate of the format for Misys, plc Misys.

Wikipedia has guidelines for notability of companies, which you can view at Wikipedia:Notability (companies and corporations). I think were you to reorganize the material according to that, and include the missing information, it might be a step in the right direction. The other thing is that wikipedia generally requires that articles by written by a disinterested third party, which (based upon your username), you probably are not. Luckily, Wikipedia also puts a third set of eyes on this prior to deletion, and that administrator will consider your explanation on that page, as well as this one of mine. Thanks for your interest in this encyclopedia! Philippe Beaudette 21:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I will read the Notability sections and peruse some examples throughout Wikipedia and rewrite accordingly. And I'm not a disinterested third party as you mentioned. I simply traverse this site often and have found references to our parent company and our competitors and felt that an article (written properly, of course) should be added to the site. Thank you again for your support and guidance for this! MisysHC 21:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Countdown timer

No problem. That was quite a little explosion of spam there... Best, Gwernol 00:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Capital IQ

I've made some changes to this page you marked to remove the advertising-ish wording of the page, someone else has removed the speedy deletion tag, but feel free take a second look and suggest improvements, thanks Evanreiser 22:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

I do so love breaking out the salt shaker. And thanks for your hard work -- I see your name around everywhere but never get a chance to let you know someone appreciates it. -- Merope 21:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

And thanks again, I didn't notice the username. Given that the creator also signed his messages as "Marc", the same name as the guy who invented the product, I'm going to leave that one deleted. -- Merope 21:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The Uriah Rennie Show

Hello Philippe. Thanks for directing me to User:LiamSAFC's most recent transgression. He is this close to a indef block, but I'm hoping a week long block will make him realize that he isn't going to get away with this again and he will give up with this article. I'd prefer not to salt it, because in doing so it may actually provide his "show" with a better Ghit. However, next time he does it, if there is one, will be his last either way. Thanks again, and keep up the excellent work. Rockpocket 05:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Eurrrrghhh. (Re: Logo Creator)

I am just so not in the mood today. Wanna take it to AFD? If not, I will. Probably. -- Merope 18:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

You know, I'm feeling charitable... I'll Wikify it. Don't tell anyone -- I'll lose my deletionist street cred. -- Merope 18:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, there's hardly anything left, but I do think that saying something was the first of its kind is an assertion of notability. It's not a good one, but it's there. I'll add it to the watchlist and come back to it when I'm less grumpy. -- Merope 18:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

What can I say?

I gotta lot of rage, and I take it out on NPP. You're doing a great job, though! I'm not sure how I feel about the {{badbio}} template--sometimes you just want to tell the kids to knock it off without being so helpful. Or I do, anyway. -- Merope 22:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Square wheel is gone

Thanks, NawlinWiki 19:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Your editing

I'll tell you something man, you've beaten me four speedy tags now after I clicked on edit. You certainly are good, keep it up! ;) BigHairRef | Talk 01:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Akhmim WOoden Tablet

The Akhmim Wooden Tablet permission to copy text from a blog has been placed (in general words) in the Akhmim Wooden Tablet talk page, as requested. Thanks for the heads up. Milogardner 18:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC) Milogardner 18:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Philippe,

It is an odd coincidence that the topic that you deleted today stressed a French Egyptologist, Georges Daressy, someone that died the year I was born. Are you not French? Humor pops up in the strangest situations.

It also appears that I have have picked up where Daressy dropped the ball in 1906, he not completing a task until Hana Vymazalova pointed me in the right direction in 2002, towards a hekat unity written as 64/64, and how all of the Akhmin Wooden Tablet was written. Best Regards, Milogardner 22:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Being Abominable
		You deserve this just as much as I do. FisherQueen (Talk) 19:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)(UTC)

Awww, thanks! Philippe Beaudette 19:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Politics Now

Dear Philippe, replied to your response to the Politics Now (weblog) issue :) Best wishes, Macbeth2 22:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Looked it over, and zapped it per CSD A7. So, in one sense, you were "wrong" in that I didn't agree it was spam, but in another sense you were correct in thinking it didn't really meet WP standards for inclusion. (I tend to reserve the spam criterion for articles written in the first person, using a lot of inflated language, or submitted by persons with the same username as the article subject. But that's just me.) -- Merope 00:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

User Warnings

I just updated my toolbox with the new {uw} user warning templates. If you decide to switch to the new templates, feel free to borrow my code if you don't feel like typing all the danged things. -FisherQueen (Talk) 21:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk:CHAK 104 NB

You're right--it shouldn't be posted there, either. In cases like these, you can use the {{db-because}} template and just say "Deleted content posted on talk page". I'm not sure that there's a speedy criterion that really applies--CSD G6 comes to mind, though--but I'm pretty sure most admins would zap that kind of thing on sight. Especially since it's on the talk page of a salted article. Anyway, 'tis gone now.  :) -- Merope 13:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

If the article has been deleted, but the talk page is still there, wouldn't {{db-talk}} apply? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the sequence of events, but I've placed that for deleted articles' talk pages that don't get deleted simultaneously. Leebo⁸⁶ 13:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, y'all! Philippe Beaudette 16:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Leebo, shut up.  :) You're absolutely right; it can apply in this situation. There are exceptions to db-talk, apparently, concerning if deletion discussion is on the talk page, but ... yeah. I suck. I'm going back to bed. -- Merope 17:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Uh oh, it looks like my dastardly plan of undermining Merope is falling into place! :) On a serious note, does "deletion discussion" cover any discussion relevant to the page's notability? Or are frivolous notability claims generally excluded from that category. Leebo⁸⁶ 17:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know. It's something that gets kicked around on the CSD talk page all the time, but I don't think the language of the criterion gets altered. I think *serious* deletion discussion (such as accompanying an AFD, for example) needs to be kept, but not "This page is true! Billy is awesome!" kinda things. Of course, this makes the criterion subjective, which is not within the spirit of CSD. Oops. However, I have faith in admins and a good chunk of new page patrollers, and so I have no problem with it being a use-your-judgement kinda deal. So. Yeah. I usually nuke the talk page along with the article when doing NPP and CAT:CSD work, but that's just because orphaned talk pages really bother me. And because 90% of the stuff I delete is pure unadulterated crap. -- Merope 20:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Only 90%? Damn, I must be looking at the wrong time of day, cuz for me about 95% of what I see is crap.  :-) Philippe Beaudette 21:26, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

RE:The Elves Impersonator

Mind sending me a link to the AfD? I don't see anything in the page history.--Isotope23 21:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

scratch that... it was speedied by Cyde and I'm just blind.--Isotope23 21:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Recently deleted Userboxes

I noticed you deleted some of my boxes, which is fine. I'm fairly new to it so if I was making a mistake please let me know what it is and how I can fix them. Never done these before. Just trying to learn something new. Sorry for the problems that I may have caused. --Thunderstix33 11:25, 31 January 2007, CST

Responded on your talkpage. Box was fine, just in the wrong space! Philippe Beaudette 05:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I did these right now. Could you take a look at them for me to make sure they are correct now? Thanks a bunch. --Thunderstix33 00:06, 1 February 2007, CST

Re: You are seriously fast

...everytime I go to speedy, you've beat me to a delete! You rock. Philippe Beaudette 06:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Ooh, thank you! I like to keep pratice with new page/ newbie's contributions patrolling. I notice that you have warned quite a few editors whose pages I have subsequently deleted. That's good work and something that I don't usually see. You keep up the good work too! This is my early morning patrol before work, so other admins will have to take over the deletion process now until I start the afternoon shift. Regards and good editing, (aeropagitica) 06:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

please do not delete the captain seven page, i will show verification of its importance ASAP.

speedy delete?

I believe that you should not have requested speedy delete for "Lenox Millionaires" as I was still editing it and finding more information.

Notorious NBG

Replied on your talk page. Philippe Beaudette 23:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your recent vandalism

Say, I didn't know you were black. I'm going to have to revise my mental picture... I was picturing you as Rupert Everett. -FisherQueen (Talk) 17:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

You know, the funny thing is that I didn't know either! I think Rupert Everett is probably closer to the truth! Actually, I get "Matthew Broderick" a lot... but then, I don't particularly see that one either. Ryan had my back on that one, and it's appreciated! :-) Philippe Beaudette 20:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, my students claim I look like Harry Potter, but I don't think they're trying to be complimentary. -FisherQueen (Talk) 20:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

It could be worse. Could be Dumbledore. Philippe Beaudette 20:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Philippebeaudette! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 16:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Street Fighter Movie: (Unannounced Title)

Here. I already found some other sources. I'll add them.

• http://www.cinemablend.com/games/New-Street-Fighter-Movie-Set-For-2008-1477.html
• http://movies.ign.com/articles/742/742504p1.html

IGN has it so that should be enough. (Lord Vader 06:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC))

Great! Thanks for adding sources. Philippe Beaudette 06:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

My name

I'm sorry you feel that way sonny, but I've had this name since before your mamma was in diapers! I don't want to "voluntarily change" it now! —Preceding unsigned comment added by J. Howard Marshall (talk • contribs)

Nice try, but as you know, J.H.M. is quite dead. :-) Points for creativity though. Philippe Beaudette 05:48, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

That's got to be an all-time fastest block. Philippe Beaudette 06:03, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: YourSportsFan

Thanks! You're fast. Philippe Beaudette 07:04, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I do try whenever I am able! This wasn't a notable website and there may be a case for a WP:3RR warning to be issued if the article is recreated, pertaining to the text removed and reinstated. Regards, (aeropagitica) 07:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

User Link Spamming

Hi, I saw that you were online through DLog. I wonder if you would mind taking a look at User:209.221.8.226? He appears to be link spamming articles. I've reverted much of it, but think he may need a block to keep him from doing too much damage. Thanks! Philippe Beaudette 23:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Done. Next time, try also WP:AIV. --cesarb 23:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

NPWatcher

You've been approved to use NPWatcher. Please give Martinp23 any feature requests or bugs. He'll also happy to help if you have any problems running the program, or any questions :). Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if he's made a new release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Finally, enjoy! -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 04:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! It's a great program. Philippe Beaudette 05:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I just signed up, too! And it's freaking me out! It ... it ... it's so fast! Faster than I am! I am highly unsettled. -- Merope 19:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

<grin> Don't be skeered, Merope... Philippe Beaudette 20:28, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I've been thinking about requesting this… but I think I'll hold off, because I want to focus more on encyclopedia building for a while. It'd be harder to motivate myself to write articles with such an easy way to NPP at my fingertips :) Leebo⁸⁶ 20:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

You know, it's funny - I'm a much better patroller than I am writer, so this doesn't really detract me. But I can see where if I were more into the writing side I would feel just like you do. Philippe Beaudette 21:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Scott dugdale

I'll remove from AfD and add a {{unreferenced}} tag, and notify the author. I am skeptical, though. --Hojimachong^talk_con 02:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Maduro Justification

Hey there - I added a justification to Maduro's page. I tried to best address the requirements for adding a musician or band. Thanks.  :) Kiaroskuro 03:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that if you'll move those references to the article (from the talk page), you're in great shape. Those look really good to me, and I've removed the speedy tag, as well as your hangon tag. Philippe Beaudette 03:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Moose (drinking game)

Hi, please see the new comments in the AFD. Thanks --AW 16:21, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Shocked

Hi can't figure for the life of me why you would want to delete the external link. The Link allows access to the community. A tool just like going to the cenus page for information. Here you can find out obituaries, births, barangay notices etc. No charges to use, or post. Insiston 10:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC)insiston

Based on your username (which was incredibly similar to the link address) and the fact that the link didn't contribute greatly to the article, nor did it establish credibility to anything in the story, I decided that it looked like link-spamming, or advertising for the website that shares your name. The fact that your only contribution to the encyclopedia has been to add that link to multiple pages seems to cement that plan. Philippe Beaudette 15:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

The username (and other) templates

On WP:RFCN you expressed an interest in the first of these templates:

{{subst:UsernameConcern|reason for objection}}

{{subst:UsernameDiscussion}}

{{subst:UsernameAllowed}}

{{subst:ArticleConcern|article name|nature of concern}}

{{subst:ArticleDiscussion|article name}}

{{subst:ArticleResult|article name|outcome of RFC}}

{{subst:ConductConcern|nature of concern}}

{{subst:ConductDiscussion}}

{{subst:ConductResult|outcome of RFC}}

You can click on the bluelinks to see the template texts and instructions. While there, you can click on the 'History" tab to see who contributed to them.

Remember to "subst:" these templates: this lets the auto-signature feature work right (so you needn't add the four tildes), and makes the message text (rather than just the template tag) visible in edit mode so the user can reply point by point.

Filling in the "reason for objection" or "nature of concern" lets you specify just what the problem is, for instance "I think this name too closely resembles the obscene word 'xxxx' in the 'yyyy' language." With the "article" template, you must enter the article name.

I hope you find these useful. -- Ben 22:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I was impressed with the wording on the first of them. Philippe Beaudette 22:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Associate professors

Associate professors are usually considered N on WP--depends on how many papers, etc. (Asst. Profs.only sometimes, Full professors almost always) The speedy you just placed has been removed, and an explanation of what to do put on the talk p. You certainly may not agree, either in general or for this person. -- and AfDs usually have a minority saying NN in such cases.--you can and should take it there and join in the arguments. But speedy is meant for incontestable cases--"Where reasonable doubt exists, discussion using another method under deletion policy is recommended." & " If the assertion is likely to be controversial .. the article should be nominated for AfD instead."--though most of them recently seem to go to prod first. Speedies involving university faculty are almost always contested and controversial. DGG 08:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your input. It would be helpful if you could include a link to the article in question - I'll dig through contributions this afternoon to see if I can find it. That makes it easier to discuss the case more specifically. Thanks! Philippe Beaudette 14:21, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

You know you want to

Have you thought of joining us at WikiProject LGBT studies? We have cookies... gay cookies. -FisherQueen (Talk) 23:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

There are cookies?! How am I just now hearing about this?! I'll check it out, thanks! Philippe Beaudette 16:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

All right, technically, there are more cookies than cookies. But it's a good time nonetheless. And if you really need a cookie, I can bake you one myself... as long as you don't mind coming to Ohio to collect it. -FisherQueen (Talk) 16:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment

Interesting that everyone wants to blast this guy, it seems almost fashionable and a number of folks are pissed off. But I know this, he only cliams to reproduce sounds for the films, not that he does them. I know the artices say different but I heard from the orses mouth when someone asked him point blank. I am sure there are some mistakes along the lines, but non of you folks who are gettig paid are getting hurt and ome drop the venom. He says he re create the sounds in films and sells them, which is not illegal or wrong. The credit is a matter of record. I hope none of you have a skeleton. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Outsidethelines (talk • contribs) 21:04, 23 February 2007

(Above comment blanked the talk page. Restoring page with comment at bottom. -- Ben 21:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC))

I guess I'm a fag?

It was sweet of you to remove the personal attack, but being called a fag is pretty much de rigeur. Never mind the fact that I'm female, or that I identify as straight. (Which, really, I'm kind of regretting, what with you and FisherQueen about.) Oh, and since this came up recently -- if you ever go up for RfA, let me know. You're probably not ready yet (just in the sense that the RfA crowd tends to be a mite bit overzealous when it comes to something that is not supposed to be a big deal), but I would definitely support you. -- Merope 03:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Aww, that's very nice of you (about RfA) - I agree that I'm probably not ready yet, but it's something I'd like to do at some point probably. But first, I wanna be sure that I'm not gonna do something really st00pid once I get there, so I have more to learn first. You'll be one of the first to know, my dear. Oh, and... come toward the dark side. Ask FisherQueen, we have more fun, and you can always count on us to be the life of the party. Philippe Beaudette 03:14, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Popups issue

Hello - Thank you for your concerns - Yes, I noticed it too. It seems to be happening only when I use popups with IE6 (which I use at work), when I use them with Firefox, there's no problem at all. I checked Lupin's talk page and I think it can be fixed somehow. I don't know any javascript at all, but I'll try to fix it too. Happy editing. - Myanw 07:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply:Notability of FLHS Student Activities

I completely understand your concern about the FLHS Student Activities page...I created this page as an addition to the Fairfield Ludlowe High School page. It listed all the clubs of the school, and subsequent details. I was transferring it from a word document, in which the original information was stored. Once I would have completed the club list, it would have been linked to the Fairfield Ludlowe High School page. I hope I am able to continue with the list, and if not, please give me suggestions of what I should do....Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Interpolarity (talk • contribs) 17:18, 25 February 2007.

Generally speaking, you should use a subpage of your userpage (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Userpage#How_do_I_create_a_user_subpage.3F) to create things such as this, and then copy them into existing articles. That saves us from having a bunch of partially completed pages floating around in the mainspace. If you need help with this, please leave me a message on my talk page, and I'll see what I can do! Thanks, and welcome. Philippe Beaudette 23:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject LGBT studies!

Hi, Philippe, welcome to WikiProject LGBT Studies! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles of interest to the LGBT community. Some points that may be helpful: Our main aim is to help improve LGBT-related articles, so if someone asks for help with an article, please try your hardest to help them if you are able. Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it. The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as article quality assessment, peer review and a project-wide article collaboration, all of which you are welcome to take part in. We also have a unique program to improve our lower quality articles, Jumpaclass, so please consider signing up there. If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign LGBT topics. If you're planning to stay, have a square in our quilt! You can put anything you want in it. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. And once again - Welcome!

Yay - more "life of the party"s :) (sorry - couldn't help reading the comment above) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 06:07, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

<Grin> Thanks for the very kind welcome. Philippe Beaudette 06:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

"PhilPhague" may have been an attack pun

From the archive of the PhilPhague username RFC: "it seems this isn't a username issue - or if it is, someone needs to spell it out for me, cuz I'm missing it." -- My best vague guess is some play on the word phage, essentially conveying "Phil the Virus" and thus an attack on Philip Gronowski. -- Ben 07:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 9	26 February 2007	About the Signpost

Three users temporarily desysopped after wheel war	Peppers article stays deleted
Pro golfer sues over libelous statements	Report from the Norwegian (Bokmål) Wikipedia
WikiWorld comic: "Pet skunk"	News and notes: New arbitrators appointed, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

As promised, a cookie from FisherQueen

Messages for March, 2007

Please leave messages below this line. Philippe Beaudette 04:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Popups issue

I see you have run into the popups issue where it leaves the $ edit summary. Apparently it's a bug with some recent changes to popups interacting with IE6.0. It doesn't seem to be a big issue, as you mostly use VP. However, if you want to fix it, you can get IE7.0 or change back to the last version of popups - see User talk:Lupin#Getting "revision $1 dated $2 by $3".--Kubigula (talk) 04:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm actually on IE 7.0.5370 - I'll check into the new version of popups though. Thanks for the help! Philippe Beaudette 05:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Penn Radio Entry

Recently you deleted the changes to the article for the radio show "penn radio" deeming the changes as not helpful. The changes were in the context of converting the show article to past tense, as the show has just today been cancelled from the CBS radio lineup.

The article should in fact be edited to reflect that the show is no longer on the air, and not be in the present tense. "The Penn Jillett show is" is incorrect. It should correctly read "The Penn Jillett show was" etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.8.111.37 (talk) 23:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

You're quite correct, and clearly that revert shouldn't have happened. I'm not sure exactly what happened there, but I apologize and hope you were able to revert it cleanly. Philippe Beaudette 01:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your message on my Meg(film) article changes

This is supposedly an encyclopedia, not a message board. I have changed the article back to the known facts that are relevant to the films current status. The things I removed are just hyperbole, and were just some MegHead's interpretation of some meaningless industry jargon. There is no film called Meg, so it doesn't even deserve an entry in the first place. Regardless, as I wrote in the discussion portion of that page, wishing or hoping a film is going to be made by a certain date does not make it so.As a matter of fact,New Line has yet again pushed back the film.Nanaharas 02:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

My concern is less with the film (never heard of it, don't really have an opinion) and more with the writing. For instance, the edits that I reverted included (among other things) the sentence "Meg is the title of an unproduced screenplay, currently still in development hell. The screenplay is based on the novel Meg by Steve Alten. "

Saying that something is in "development hell" is not encyclopedic, nor is it relevant. It is, in fact, pushing a point of view which is something that we frown on here...

Were you to rewrite the sections without the POV, I think all would be well with the world. Philippe Beaudette 03:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Development Hell is a commonly used industry term that refers to scripted projects that have been in turn around or been delayed multiple times for many years. I even link to it's page right here on Wiki that defines it (tho if I would change a couple words phrase suchs as 'never get made'). So putting Meg in that category is not POV. The MEG situation fits that description and falls into that category. In fact the Meg article page should be removed and a short write up on it put on that page instead. I'd do it but I have gotten a lot of flack for trying to 'clean things up' , so I hardly bother contributing here anymore. In many cases (the Teena Brandon page for one...first off Teena NEVER used the name Brandon Teena) , POV is mostly what that article consists of, yet even the mere suggestion that it be re-written gets all kinds of flack and threats.Nanaharas 00:52, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

You stole my cookie!

I was reading you page regarding a certain request for the speedy delete of a page I made, when I spotted one of you so called rules offering a cookie! Thats my stick! Why Philippe, why? Your page is very humorous. I thank thee for that. - Thekittenofterra 05:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcome new username!

Welcome!

Hello, Philippe, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  -FisherQueen (Talk) 11:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Prod

Dude, did you just PRODwarn yourself? -- Merope 01:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

That SO was not supposed to happen. NPWatcher misfired. I've gotten so used to the other program (but I'm blocked since the username change) and obviously, I screwed up and hit the wrong button! I'm glad you noticed, though.... FisherQueen would have mocked me mercilessly. I love that about her. :-) Philippe Beaudette 01:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, well, that was an easy problem to fix! I think you are approved now. -- Merope 01:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

For which one? VandalProof is the problem. :( Bless you for trying, you're a saint. Philippe Beaudette 01:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I approved you for NPWatcher. I don't believe I can approve people for VP (though I could, of course, be wrong). -- Merope 01:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

You rock. :-) Thanks for the approval... I'll wait on VP. Have you used that one? It's seriously cool. Faster than NPWatcher, too. Philippe Beaudette 01:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Nope, never have. I do have the pretty rollback button, though.  ;) I tried NPWatcher for a while but found it was slower than I am. Plus, I couldn't tell if users had been warned before. Maybe next week when work at the office slows down I'll play with it. -- Merope 01:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Best thing about NPWatcher is the AfD and Notify and Prod (and notify) buttons. (When some idiot doesn't prod warn himself). It automates that process, which makes it worth its weight in gold.

Rfa thanks

Hey Philippe, just wanted to say thanks a bunch for supporting my Rfa and thanks for the congrats! Its so weird having these extra tools, but I certainly won't abuse them. No doubt I'll catch you at WP:RFCN soon Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 17:56, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 12	20 March 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream"	News and notes: Bad sin, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Philippe! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 00:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, your name is on the list. How far are you able to log in? Did you try the "remember me" trick? Prodego ^talk 03:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

But the 'Ch' and entering your password part works, right? Prodego ^talk 03:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, that would be it. You were not on the old userlist (which I should go blank). Prodego ^talk 03:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Certainly. Happy editing! Prodego ^talk 03:28, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 13	26 March 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Tardiness, volunteers, RSS
Patrick and Wool resign in office shakeup	WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
News and notes: Board resolutions, milestones	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Cleveland, Ohio

Dude, look at the diff, you reverted back the the vandalized version. I have (re-) fixed it. Caknuck 06:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about removing the warning. I'd rather leave it up with the explanation than delete it and have people think I have anything to hide ;) Keep fighting the good anti-vandal fight! Caknuck 15:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

SatyrBot 05:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Madhu Omalloor

Hello, Madhu Omalloor is a non-notable bio. A cartoonist and sub-editor without even a single notable award to cite is not even borderline notable. The two awards mentioned are highly suspect. One is a fellowship. Anyway, not supported by any reference. Can you please send it to AfD? I am a blocked user. 59.91.253.128 06:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, let me think on that a bit, actually. I'm going to get some advice. I don't really have a problem sending it to AfD, but I think it's best that someone else do it, because I don't want it to appear that I'm acting as a proxy for a blocked user. Let me ask around and see if that's going to be an issue. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, I really do appreciate your interest in meeting notability standards on Wikipedia. Philippe 06:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

VP edit to Institute for Advanced Study, Berlin

You reverted a legitimate edit of mine to Institute for Advanced Study, Berlin using VP (history here). Since it was a legitimate edit, I've now reverted it back. If it was a mistake, then no harm no foul. If you don't want the sentence in that article, we can talk about it on the Talk page there. Or, if you thought it was vandalism, I'm curious why. Thanks. 71.77.5.234 06:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

You know, I hate to admit that I'm not sure why I reverted that. As you point out, it sure looks like an appropriate and sourced edit. Thank you for pointing it out and reverting it. Philippe 06:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Like I said, no harm no foul. 71.77.5.234 06:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Madhu Omalloor

Regarding your post to WP:ANI before considering nominating the article for deletion, don't forget to check if someone vandalized it prior to this request. Sometimes unexperienced users forget to check the history and banned users have no problems with messing up an article before sending a message like the one you got. Some input from a regional noticeboard is probably a good idea too. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

warning removed

I appreciate you finding that, but you'll notice that I was actually reverting vandalism (two previous spam edits) and actually accidentally reverted back to a version that wasn't clean. Given that, I'm not sure a vandalism warning was really the way I'd have gone there. I appreciate your hard work - but please be careful about templating the regulars... it can occassionally backfire. Thanks for catching my mistake! Philippe 20:17, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Strange, I remember reverting 75.25.183.44. Maybe I should switch to popups :) Thanks for tracking my mistake. Michaelas10^{Respect my authoritah} 20:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Petticoat

I think there should be a link to Petticoating (the one you deleted) in the Petticoat article so people can be more aware of the consequences of such form of discipline. 71.231.210.181 20:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Manface (nick owens)

Thanks for catching my error. I was patrolling for spam, and the wording was obviously crap, so I reverted it without noticing the hangon tag. My error. This is how we learn. Thanks again. Cmichael 02:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 9th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 15	9 April 2007	About the Signpost

Danny Wool regains adminship in controversial RFA	Leak last year likely to produce changes for handling next board election
Association of Members' Advocates' deletion debate yields no consensus	WikiWorld comic: "Fake shemp"
News and notes: Donation, Version 0.5, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Christisoursavior

Actually, this one will probably have to go to ANI. I was first alerted to the user when I saw him advocating deletion of Intel Pentium Dual Core on Benon's talk page (the AFD tag was reverted and no afd was actually created). Then, looking through his contribs, I found that image upload, which is most certainly not GFDL or {{PD-ineligible}}. There are a lot more things to solve with him besides his username. – Chacor 04:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

This is the image in question, btw: Image:Cheongshim.jpg... Could you please bring this up at ANI? I would but have little time right now. – Chacor 04:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't necessarily disagree, but I figured that when he actually requested the change (which I verified), he was making a good-faith effort, so I wanted to respond with equal good faith. I know he wasn't initially very responsive, but I want to think that he's just making some bad "first steps" and can be reformed. He's certainly indicated that willingness in my recent interactions with him, so... if you want to take it to ANI, I certainly wouldn't fight you on it. But, he appears to be working on at least one of the issues, so I'm going to hope that he's learning and reforming. Philippe 04:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I do have one request then, can you ask him to stop striking everything on his talk page out, especially when it hasn't actually been solved? The only thing solved, as far as I can see, is his username. – Chacor 04:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure... I went to do it, but Coredesat beat me to it. I'll keep an eye on this one... I'm still a little itchy feelin' about this user, so I'll keep him on my watchlist. If it's just a quirky user, maybe we can get 'em on the straight and narrow. Philippe 04:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 16th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 16	16 April 2007	About the Signpost

Encyclopædia Britannica promoted to featured article	Wikipedia continues to get mixed reactions in education
WikiWorld comic: "Hodag"	News and notes: Wikipedia television mention makes news, milestones
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

TeckWiz's RFA

Hey Philippe. Thanks for supporting my unsuccessful RFA this week under my old name, TeckWiz. I'm now known simply as User:R. I hope to keep helping and improving Wikipedia alongside you. --TeckWiz is now R ^ParlateContribs_@(Lets go Yankees!) 21:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I really wish you would post first...

Why can't you just post something on my Talk page if I made the Gracie Folds page wrong? Seriously...Wiki editors are supposed to assist the newcomers. Not just instantly throw something for deletion without trying to reason it out... JoshEdgar 23:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Responded on your talk page... I did leave you a note there, and pointed you to the notability requirements. If you can demonstrate notability, I'm pleased to help you work on the page. Philippe 23:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I see you did. Sorry I got all in a huff. So can you help me reformat it? I didn't think it had to be too extensive...I thought it was more of a stub but there is no stub for Ben Folds in general. JoshEdgar 23:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

New page patrol

It's usually best to subst any warnings like {{badbio}}. One reason is so that the warning remains if the template is ever deleted. (That happens sometimes.) Thanks for your help on new page patrol, — coelacan — 00:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Doh, I knew that... I just somehow neglected to set up my macros that way. :-) Thanks for pointing it out! Philippe 00:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 23rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 17	23 April 2007	About the Signpost

Administrator goes rogue, is blocked	Wales unblocks Brandt, then reverses himself
Historian detained after his Wikipedia article is vandalized	Efforts to reform Requests for Adminship spark animated discussion
Canadian politician the subject of an edit war	Virginia Tech massacre articles rise to prominence
Wikipedia enters China one disc at a time	WikiWorld comic: "Buttered cat paradox"
News and notes: Unreferenced biographies, user studies, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

WAVY Correction

Thanks:) I caught my own mistake and was coming to fix it and ya beat me to it. I greatly appericate it. Take care....SVRTVDude ^(VT) 21:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

British Columbia Provincial Police

What the hell are you talking about? bobanny 00:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I am referring to the image you removed and changed.... in a section on the first chief constable, you removed the image, which was appropriate, to substitute another that frankly doesn't add anything to the article. Also, I'd encourage you to be a little less hostile on other users' talk pages. Philippe 02:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Sometimes condescension begets hostility. I'm an experienced editor with an extensive and solid track record on Wikipedia. To get a template message on my talk page, disingenuously welcoming me to Wikipedia before accusing me of "experimenting" and telling me to shove off to the sandbox and not come back until I get some schooling on the welcome page is about as insulting as it gets. Personally, I would've preferred you to be up front and called me an incompetent fool instead of implying as much with a template.

As for the photos, I replaced the Chartres Brew photo (which was added by me earlier) because he has his own article and that's what it illustrates (which isn't removing content from Wikipedia, since I added more than I removed and the image is used elsewhere). There is no section on the first chief constable; the article has no sections. I uploaded these other photos specifically to illustrate the BCPP (and did use the edit summary, btw). The BCPP was a major force in the province's history, and I don't really get how you think a studio portrait of some guy in a suit illustrates that. The images I added show different aspects of the BCPP as it existed and convey as much if not more than the text of the article. If you sincerely want to contest that, then bring it over to the talk page and make your case there instead of implying I'm incompetent, ignorant, or both - that's how it's supposed to work. If these photos don't add anything to the article in your opinion, then show some courtesy and back up that opinion with constructive reasons if you can.

Perhaps before trying to school legitimate editors and making absurd allegations, you might consider brushing up on some of the guidelines yourself. I'd suggest starting with WP:AGF and WP:AHI. In light of how discouraging your authoritative actions might've been received by a less-seasoned editor, I'd also suggest WP:BITE. I appreciate the need to keep on top of vandalism and inappropriate edits, but it's no less important to avoid undermining the volunteer efforts that build Wikipedia in the process. bobanny 04:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

You're absolutely correct that you should not have gotten a templated note - ordinarily, I check to see someone's contribution history before sending a template macro: I'm not sure how I neglected that step, but I'll continue to pay attention to that in this process. I appreciate you calling it to my attention, and apologize that you were offended. Philippe 15:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Good enough, and sorry for my grumpiness. bobanny 19:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

CMP Radio

Why is CMP Radio not allowed an article, but obscure Djs are? Makes no sense whatsoever. TurkeyTwizzler07 14:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

As I said on your talk page, the issue is notability - if you can demonstrate that CMP has notability, and provide reliable sources, you stand a better shot of keeping the article. Read the section on Notability, then see if you can demonstrate that: if you can, let me know, and I'll help you change the article to demonstrate that. Philippe 14:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 18	30 April 2007	About the Signpost

Students in Western Civilization course find editing Wikipedia frustrating, rewarding	Statistics indicate breadth of Wikipedia's appeal
Featured lists reaches a milestone	Backlogs continue to grow
WikiWorld comic: "Calvin and Hobbes"	News and notes: Board resolutions, user studies, milestones
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! :)

Aww, thanks, dear Philippe! :) It's so great to talk to a fellow Oklahoman! You know, there are so many Texans around (and good ones, don't get mad at me if you read this, Longhorns!), that every time we find each other, we gotta stick together ;) Anyway, you'd made me blush with your kind words - all I can say is, thank you! I'm not usually an IRC person, I simply dropped by tonight to see if I could find someone; but who knows, I might just get the hang of it someday ;) It's great to meet you, and please, let's keep in touch, k? Let me know if I can ever be of assistance to you, and please, do drop by my Talk page whenever you want. Cheers! :) Phaedriel - 04:04, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you Philippe, for voting on my RfA. Although it failed, I will try to improve in the ways pointed out to me, and maybe I will become an admin next time. If you have any comments, questions, etc., you know where to go. ¿SFGiДnts! ☺ ☻ 22:14, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the Indiana University correction in Anti-gravity.Tcisco 13:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

You're quite welcome.  :-) Philippe 06:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 19	7 May 2007	About the Signpost

Four administrator accounts desysopped after hijacking, vandalism	Digg revolt over DVD key spills over to Wikipedia
Debate over non-free images heats up	Update on Wikimania 2007
Norwegian Wikipedian awarded scholarship	WikiWorld comic: "Friday the 13th"
News and notes: Election volunteers, admin contest, milestones	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to Politics of Quebec

Hi. I noticed you made some spelling changes. I was interested in the capitalization of francophone, anglophone, etc. So I added a section to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters) on the topic of words like that. In my opinion, WP:ENGVAR, in conjunction with the information I've added to the capitalization page, implies that the word francophone should not be capitalized in articles related to countries other than the U.S., should be capitalized in U.S.-related articles (especially when it's a noun), and should be left to the preference of the editor and not be "corrected" in articles that are not country-related. Politics of Quebec is Canada-related, so Canadian preferences should be respected. I am certain this was inadvertent, but it should become a reflex for editors making spelling changes to determine whether the spelling "mistake" they've found may be a legitimate variant. Joeldl 10:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Replied on your talk. Philippe 16:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I added the material after you made the changes, so there's no reason you should have noticed it. Joeldl 18:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Your Edits to Pipil page

Hi Philippe,

Thanks for reviewing and editing. Just FYI, in doing bibliography, you generally use the capitalization of the language of publication, as I understand it. Spanish language book/article titles usally only capitalize the first word (eg.. Recordación florida instead of Recordación Florida )so technically the book/aritcle titels were correct before your edits. I did not change your edits on this page. I just point this out for your information. Rsheptak 20:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

You are entirely correct, and I'm surprised I missed that one. <mumbles> slow down... read carefully... </mumbles> Philippe 20:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Tulsa, Oklahoma Article

Thanks for the encouragement. Okiefromokla•talk 16:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment on my talk page

I just noticed you left a message on my talk page about me attacking another user, but couldn't find out where exctly as my last edit on the page which was linked dates from 2005, could you point it more accurately or is it just gone? TiCPU 17:25, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Whew, good question - that one took a few minutes to track down. The page in question is Brunnis, which has since been set up to redirect to Lexx. But, if you look at [1] the page history, you can see what was actually on the page prior to the redirect, which an admin set up, and frankly I should have done that myself - rather than tagging it as speedy, I should have called that vandalism and reverted. Why it slapped that warning on you, I'm not sure, because it should have gone to another user - you didn't do it - someone after you did. I'm not sure why that happened, except it was a problem in the script and it shouldn't have fired it on you. Best guess, the script saw that I put a speedy on it, and it fired that warning at you since you created the page, rather than the person that the put the vandalism on it. My apologies, and I'll happily remove the warning from your talk page. Thanks for bringing it to my attention! Philippe 22:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

AWB typo fixes

Greetings! I noticed you used AWB on Biology and sexual orientation and it changed two of the last names in the references from Vilain to Villain. Just wanted to let you know so that you can watch out for those kinds of incorrect changes when using AWB. Cheers, --Rkitko ^(talk) 02:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Crimey! That's bad! Thanks. Philippe 02:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

"Curly"

Thanks for applying the speedy deletion template, I wasn't quite sure what to do with this one. I left a light warning on the creators talk page. Omega Archdoom^Talk 04:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou very much, it sure does! Omega Archdoom^Talk 04:47, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Philippe, thank you for your kind words in support of my RfA. Please feel free to drop me a note any time if there is anything that I might be able to do for you. Pastordavid 15:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Userpage request - sure thing!

You have my word I'll make you a userpage, dear Philippe! Please, be patient tho - I currently have 5 requests! ;) I promise it'll be ready in a week at the very most, is that ok with you? And if you don't mind, if you have any preferences regarding color, or layout, please let me know - that'll make the task easier ;) Love Phaedriel - 01:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Indeed

Your mother makes good point.

However I'm not sure I quite understand what pattern of unusual edits you're referring to (I don't see 3, which is coincidence as your mother says)? --PaxEquilibrium 23:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

That's a fair question. It's not unusual edits, but unusual circumstances. I will also say that I have not spent a great deal of time paying attention to your edits prior to this RFA, so frankly, you haven't been on my radar screen. My hesitation may be simply because this is the first I've seen and I'm a little shocked by the unusual circumstances that surround you. It's entirely possible that the more I get to know you, the less I'll be concerned by those circumstances. I know adminship is not a big deal, but the access to the tools IS a big deal, and you have (at best) a previously compromised account. I tend to view that much more harshly than some others. I'm not sure I have formed an opinion on whether I believe that the account was compromised or that is a story to cover another situation. Either way, I have hesitations. However, they are not perpetually exclusive: should this RFA pass, you will have my full support (not that it matters much) because the community will have spoken. Should it not pass, I will continue to observe you and fully develop my feelings and it is entirely possible that I will support you, should you choose to stand for adminship again. I do NOT include in my reasons for a lack of support the fact that you've stood before: it frankly doesn't matter to me how many times you stand for this, and I'm happy to put that in writing, obviously.

I am, however, impressed with your ability to accept constructive criticism and to quickly take action on it. That shows an impressive point of character, and went in your "plusses" column in my book, frankly.

I guess, in summary, I just need to see more plusses to offset the large number of unknown factors in your past. I'm pleased that you approached me for clarification, and happy to give it. You have my support and respect as a person; I'm just not sure that I'm quite ready to endorse for adminship. The good news is, in the grand scheme of things, I certainly don't carry any votes with me... I doubt anyone changes their mind based upon the power of my suggestion. I do, sincerely, wish you the very best. Philippe 02:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

And that's a fair answer. ;)

Since this RfA is very likely going to fail (only 60% support, and only with deducting the several highly controversial results of votestacking; I myself wouldn't support a candidate that had that kind a huge controversial Oppose section), it doesn't really matter.

So could you please start now?

P.S. Yes, your vote does matter. As per the Comments and the Talk page, I said I will withdraw the RfA if I see a single strong reason why I should not be an administrator.

I would also like to hear someone say if the death hoax has made it impossible for me to ever get adminship. I would gladly accept that, evading the situation of several people who just keep opposing. --PaxEquilibrium 07:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I hate to suggest this, but... given the current percentages, have you consider a snowball withdrawl? I think it might be better for you, long term, to withdraw than to fail to reach consensus again. Please understand I intend no offense by this suggestion. Philippe 01:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC) Withdrawn. Looking at it again, depending on how many of the opposes are disallowed, there's still a chance. That makes it an uphill battle, not a snowball situation. Forget I asked. Philippe 01:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Well the withdrawing is that which occurred - the first time I withdrew because I was an inexperienced prick, a fool with the desire for petty admin tools (who would quite possibly misuse them), and the latter was withdrawn by the bureaucrats because of numerous nationalist votestacking (that appears to be re-appearing, although to a much lesser extent, at least for now).

One administrator (can't remember which precisely) has advised me to let at least one RfA last to the end, properly. ;)

Cheers, mate. --PaxEquilibrium 19:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Re. Your work with other users

Many thanks for your kind words. To be honest, with the whole Betacommand arbitration case I felt it was important that there were findings of fact that Beta made a mistake, but I still think it was wrong that he lost the tools - arbitration could have been a final warning to him, but I guess the arbitrators didn't see it that way. What I don't think people understood was that Betacommand's activity level is massive, he's got far more edits than most people, so obviously he will have made more mistakes - it's just sad we lost one of our best backlog clearing admins. I hope I've lived upto expectations. Thanks once again, Ryan Postlethwaite 14:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Sorry

This was a huge mistake. Could you get this page deleted? So sorry, added to wrong wikiHHermans 02:15, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 21	21 May 2007	About the Signpost

Corporate editing lands in Dutch media	Spoiler warnings may be tweaked
WikiWorld comic: "Disruptive technology"	News and notes: LGBT project mention, milestones
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi Philippe. I'd like to thank you for your support of my RfA. It was closed at surprising 75/0/0, so I'm an admin now. MaxSem 22:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Peacent Rfa

Hello, Philippe. Thank you very much for your kind support on my recent Rfa, it succeeded! I feel thrilled and hope to live up to your expectations. If you spot me messing things up, please feel free to shout at me :) Have a super day! ~ Yours faithfully, PeaceNT 11:46, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Email

Just to let you know, I've sent you an email :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 23:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

And I have answered it. Thanks! Philippe 23:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 16:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Page move of Astronaut Memorial

I am proposing a page move of Astronaut Memorial. You have edited that page in the last month. Normally I wouldn't spam user pages, but since that page does not see much action at all, and I don't want to go thru the work of fixing re-directs if people end up disagreeing, I'm soliciting your opinion prior to the move. If you don't care, or if you only edited the article for anti-vandalism or copyedit work, please ignore this message and accept my apologies for the interruption. Otherwise, please comment at Talk:Astronaut Memorial. --barneca (talk) 19:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Cheers, --Fire Star 火星 03:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Gheemoo

Nah, I don't mind. Speedy has more weight than prod, I just couldn't figure out how to tag it. Kwsn^(Ni!) 19:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Using it already. Kwsn^(Ni!) 19:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Thanks for correcting some of my spelling errors on the Tulsa Philharmonic page. I know I need a citation at that one spot but unfortunately my knowledge there comes through personal experience. I have many friends/ teachers who were part of the Tulsa Phil in its latter years and so I have somewhat of an insiders point of view on the orchestra. Unfortunately I am unable to find a source that talks about the internal financial issues and missmanagements in writing. Do you know of any? I am currently trying to find some other sources on the orchestra's history. The orchestra exsisted for 54 years and there is surprisingly very little information available about it anywhere on the web. - Nrswanson 05:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)nrswanson

No problem, I'm happy to help with spelling and such issues - those are the sort of things I tend to work on. As for finding a citation, that's harder - if I were you I'd probably call Tim McFadden or Marta Mattes at the Symphony office and find out if there was anything published that we could refer to. The other thing you might try is a search of the Tulsa World's archives. If there's not, we really need to take that statement out (although I tend to agree with it) as unverified. As far as Wikipedia is concerned, if it can't be proven with Reliable Sources, then we can't publish it. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help, and welcome to Wikipedia. Philippe | Talk 05:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. I will try communicating with them sometime this week. Does wikipedia allow interview sources? or is it strictly limmitted to written sources? I have also created pages for Light Opera Oklahoma and the Tulsa Symphony Orchestra today if you wouldn't mind looking at them too. Always good to have an extra set of eyes. :-)Nrswanson 06:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for checking up on those for me and helping me figure out wiki. I am currently doing the Music Man and Sweeney Todd with LOOK so that's why I put the page up. Hopefully it will help garner interest for the shows. I have several friends/ former teachers in TSO so that's why I started that page. I put next season's schedule on there in the hopes that people would get interested in going to see the orchestra. In doing the LOOK page I noticed there is no Tulsa Ballet or Tulsa PAC article so those are my next couple projects.Nrswanson 06:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes I do know Casey. Actually I fill in for Eric at Trinity when he is sick or out of town so I met him first through doing music at church before LOOK. I do not know Casey well though. Have a good night!

Rock it forum

I saw that, thanks, I also replied to the article's creaotr on why their article was deleted so often. Wildthing61476 20:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 24	11 June 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor
Privacy report lists Wikipedia among best sites, but needing improvement	Board candidacies open, elections planned
WikiWorld comic: "Why did Mike the Headless Chicken cross the road?"	News and notes: Ontario error, no consensus RFA, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Pitino

I don't know if there's a hard and fast rule, but I think we usually use the flag under which the subject was born. He was born in 1952, when the 48-star flag was in use. Biruitorul 03:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I tell you, that's a new one on me! - Philippe | Talk 03:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, so I read WP:Flag, which says: The use of flag icons in the birth and death information in a biographical article's introduction and/or infobox is strongly deprecated, as flags imply nationality. Based on that, I'm just going to remove the flag from that infobox. - Philippe | Talk 03:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

That too is fine with me, as I don't much like the proliferation of those little flags, which seem to be everywhere. I think readers will be fine without a little pictogram to guide them. Biruitorul 04:19, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Geoff Bell (broadcaster)

Thanks for your comment. I very rarely nominate for speedy delete (not that I've been a Wikipedian so long). I am not an admin, and was not the one that actually deleted it:

• 09:36, June 14, 2007 Daniel (Talk | contribs) deleted "Geoff Bell (broadcaster)" (CSD A7(Bio): Biographical article that does not assert significance)

-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bearian (talk • contribs)

Thank you

Hi Philippe, Thank you for your comments at my RfA. Let me know if I can help you and feel free to let me know if I mess up anywhere. Cheers. Shyamal 03:18, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 25	18 June 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor
Wikipedia critic's article merged	Board election series: Election information
Admin account apparently compromised, blocked	Controversial RfA withdrawn, bureaucrats fail to clarify consensus
WikiWorld comic: "They Might Be Giants"	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

What you just posted on User talk:Ben Borsellino

Is that a template? It looks a lot more helpful to a newbie posting their own biography than the standard nn-warn template. Thanks! Iknowyourider (t c) 01:52, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Sweet, thanks! I'm adding that one to my toolbox... also, I might create a {{subst:badband}} template derived from that one. Iknowyourider (t c) 01:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

That's a great idea. Let me know if you do, please! - Philippe | Talk 02:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:badband; usage is exactly the same. Iknowyourider (t c) 02:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Awesome! I'm adding that to my macros. Thanks! - Philippe | Talk 06:08, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Having a need for it, I just now also made Template:badorg, for organizations or groups. Iknowyourider (t c) 07:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC) And Template:badweb. Iknowyourider (t c) 08:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you X 100

Thank you very much for supporting my RfA, which closed successfully yesterday... W00t! I hope to be a great admin (and editor) and I'm sure you can tell that my use of a large, boldfaced, capital "T" and a big checkmark image in this generic "thank you" template that I swiped from some other user's Talk Page that I totally mean business! If you need anything in the future or if you see that I've done something incorrectly, please come to my Talk Page and let me know. So now I've got a bunch of reading to do.... see you around! - eo 13:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC) Endorsement Oscar Meta Board elections Please see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Endorsements#Oscar 29. Koen Amatata 21:46, 17 June 2007 (UTC) No link from local wiki to meta. Philippe 05:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC) Link from local wiki to meta added : see [17] Koen Amatata 07:54, 21 June 2007 Thanks, I've reinstated the endorsement. - Philippe | Talk 21:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC) Recent revert of additions to history of video games I can only assume that you made a mistake just now reverting my edits to history of video games. This was the continuation of a major update that I began last month and included no vandalism. I think you need to explain yourself. As a long-standing and influential contributor, I am sure that this was not done out of malice, but it is nonetheless confusing. Indrian 22:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC) My concern with these was the POV from which they were written. For instance: considered the first great racing game by providing the most realistic racing action yet seen in the arcade as well as being..." Considered by whom? Do you have sources to validate that? That's subjective text, which we normally don't tend to include in Wikipedia. If you can come up with valid third party sources to back that up, please list them using the appropriate citation tools. Otherwise, I'd encourage you to consider rewriting, which is what I was leaving on the talk page when you wrote me here. :-) - Philippe | Talk 22:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC) First, I do have sources, including High Score: The Illustrated History of Video Games and The Video Games Guide, though, granted, I did not cite them on the page. Second, the appropriate course of action would be to put a citation needed tag or raise the concern on the talk page, which I assume you must be aware. Third, having a problem with a single line is no excuse to revert a massive edit. I assume you do not know much about video game history and would appreciate it if in the future you bring any concerns to the article talk page or through use of tags rather than reckless reverts. I appreciate and respect your concern for the integrity of the encyclopedia; I only ask that you discuss before resorting to reversion. Indrian 23:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC) I didn't say I had a problem with a single line - I said that was an example of them. I felt the writing was significantly POV - revertion was the easiest way to clear it out - and as I said, I was in the process of leaving a message on the talk, but cancelled it, since you brought it here. I'm sorry you disagreed with my actions, and hope that you understand I was acting in good faith. I believe you were as well. I'm sure you understand that to see that sentence, among others, it looked like a POV edit. Since you have sources, I encourage you to add them, and then we can all move on. Wish you the best... - Philippe | Talk 02:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC) I know you were acting in good faith and do not believe there is a major problem between us. My only request is that in the future on this video game history article that you take any concerns you have to the talk page or leave tags instead of blanket reverts. I do plan to source the article as part of a massive overhaul that will probably take many months, and the page as it exists now is a massive work in progress. I have yet to make any claims in the article that are controversial to one who knows the history of video games, which is why your revert particularly took me aback. I do not claim to be perfect and may make a mistake or cross the POV line at some point, but discussing the issues will be a better way to resolve the problem than reverting. Anyway, this may be too much discussion over what I am sure for you was just one small edit among dozens, but this is a large project for myself so I find it important to discuss. You certainly do not have to reply and may end this dialogue at your discretion. I wish you the best as well. Indrian 02:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC) Thank you, dear Philippe! :) Thank you for all that you have done! How much love resides therein! All one's gifts are never gone: Not seen, perhaps, but stored within. Kindness is an inner sun. Your unspent heart a message sends Of grace and sacrifice hard-won Upon which happiness depends! Thank you so much, dear Philippe! :) Love, Phaedriel 11:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC) My dear Philippe, I couldn't possibly leave your beautiful wishes unreplied, not coming from one of the most wonderful guys I've met here. To my shame, your userpage design still sits at my sandbox, unfinished; rest assured you'll be surprised in a matter of days (cross fingers! ;) Love you, mon ami. Hugs, Phaedriel - 11:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 26 25 June 2007 About the Signpost Board election series: An interview with the candidates RfA receives attention, open proxies policy reviewed WikiWorld comic: "Thagomizer" News and notes: Logo error, Norwegian chapter, milestones Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:56, 26 June 2007 (UTC) Slater Meh, it's okay. You did your best. DS 22:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC) Arthur Bushby page Philippe, you were a little quick on the trigger there...first of all, it was a STUB. Second of all, i was in the process of completing it. Because of your deletion, 20 minutes of edits were never "Saved"... my suggestion is that you put a WARNING message up before deleting...so at least you can judge it more fully. Since i did not save my work, i'm not motivated to go back and complete again. Sxfranklin 06:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC) I'm sorry you feel frustrated by the deletion of that article. The article was tagged for speedy deletion (thus, warned) at 05:29 UTC and deleted at 05:42 UTC. Sometimes Speedy Delete is just that... speedy. But, I'll say in defense of both myself and the other editor (the one who tagged it for speedy), when we saw the article, it consisted of ONLY a couple of links. There was no sign that anyone was working on it. To our eyes, it was a link without context or any explanation at all. So, we took the appropriate action: the other article placed a notice of speedy deletion on it, and then about 15 minutes later, I deleted the article. If you'd like to recreate the article at some point, which I hope you will, I'd suggest that you have more than a link in it the first time you save the article. That way, this won't happen again. Again, I apologize that you're frustrated. - Philippe | Talk 17:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Phillippe, thank you for your explanation--i'm glad there was some time "delta" between flagging and deletion. Unfortunately i was too busy editing the other 95% of the article to notice either. I apparetnly pushed "save" pre-maturely, and did not realize there was only one link on it (it was midnight EDT, after all). It's too bad that WP does not have a "save to temp" file that a post-deletion edit can go into...cause i pushed save and it all disappeared due to the "Deletion" status. So that was a complete waste of 30 minutes and i really don't feel like spending the 30 minutes writing it up again--it was not the primary focus area of my research. But since I had all the resource info in front of me at the time, so i decided to WP a favor and write up a STUB for on of Victoria's key citizens and supply some links and resources for another editor to improve upon it later on. SINCE IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ATTEND THE WP COUNCILS, CAN YOU SUGGEST A "POST-DELETE LOG" THAT WOULD HOLD ITEMS SAVED AFTER A DELETION. It seems like a relatively simple feature technically, and I think it would reduce a lot of frustration due to lost work. Thanks. Sxfranklin 19:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Sxfranklin, I'll email Tim Starling and make the suggestion. I think it's a good one. - Philippe | Talk 02:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Messages to Philippe Hello Phillipe, it was not our intention to make blatant advertizing to DASH signature but to record its history, the links to product pages shouldn't have been there, but you deleted the page before we're able to fix that, <sigh> So we'll try to rewrite the page in different form ok? BTW following http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Instruments and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kompakt_%28Native_Instruments%29 which has not been deleted, ciao, Luigi User:Rockermang Why did you revert my edits to this user's profile? It is well documented that the edits I made are factual, and the user has not had the option to decide if he wants it on his profile or not.71.197.197.100 02:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Yeah, see, here's the thing - you don't get to call people juvenile names on Wikipedia. We tend to take a dim view of that. Why not pick a nice article to improve instead? Oh, and by the way... we have civility rules here. - Philippe | Talk 02:21, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Well it's in my belief that Rockermang would like to keep those edits. 71.197.197.100 02:26, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Well, that's not your decision to make. Nice try though! :-) - Philippe | Talk 02:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Maybe we should ask him? 71.197.197.100 02:33, 30 June 2007 (UTC) Haha, the version you just reverted was put up by Rockermang himself XD XD 71.197.197.100 03:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC) I'm well aware of that. :-) YOU DIDN'T SIGN THAT! Haha, I'm a good little boy about signing. How could you do such a thing against his will??? 71.197.197.100 03:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC) I'm just mean like that. :-) - Philippe | Talk 03:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC) John zalewski Not quite sure what your message meant but the page has been redeleted. :-) Pascal.Tesson 02:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC) Hi You have the worst name. I bet you are a huge nerd that will never kiss a girl because you are really pale and edit wikipedia all day. Get a life!!! Oh, maybe you will kiss a wikibabe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Californiadrew (talk • contribs) Well, for what it's worth, kissing girls isn't all that interesting to me. There are other folks around who might enjoy it, but... I sure appreciate you sharing your opinion though. (And he's not so far off on the amount of time spent editing wikipedia.)- Philippe | Talk 03:48, 1 July 2007 (UTC) I agree that you are a huge nerd that will never kiss a girl... but in my book, both of those are good things. -FisherQueen (Talk) 18:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC) Look, I'm a nerd, and girls = yucky, but for the record... I'm not huge. Slightly pudgy, perhaps, but definitely not huge. - Philippe | Talk 20:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC) Huge, of course, refers to the enormity of your nerditude, and not the enormity of your person. When I picture you, I picture something along these lines. -FisherQueen (Talk) 20:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC) OMG! YOU CRACKED THE CODE! My secret identity is out! Foiled again! One of these days I'll upload a real picture of myself - not just one of those paparazzi ones that always grace the cover of People magazine. - Philippe | Talk 20:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC) My RfA Thank you for participating in my RfA. It was successful, and I am now, may God have mercy on us all, an administrator. Look at all the new buttons! I had heard about 'protect,' 'block user,' and 'delete,' but no one told me about 'kill,' 'eject,' and 'purée.' I appreciate the trust the community has in me, and I'll try hard not to delete the main page or block Jimbo. -FisherQueen (Talk) 18:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 27 2 July 2007 About the Signpost IP unwittingly predicts murder of wrestler: "Awful coincidence" Board election series: Elections open German chapter relaunches website, arranges government support WikiWorld comic: "Cashew" Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 28 9 July 2007 About the Signpost Seven administrators request promotion to bureaucrat status Board election series: Elections closed, results pending Wikimedia Foundation hires consultant, general counsel Newspaper obituary plagiarizes Japanese Wikipedia WikiWorld comic: "Ann Coulter" News and notes: FA stats, top information site, milestones Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC) LGBT WikiProject Newsletter Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC). RfA nom Ryan, thank you for the nomination, I'm honored. I've started to draft my answers, and once I get some things wrapped up (24 hours or so?) I'll transclude the page. Again, thank you - you're very kind. - Philippe | Talk 02:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC) The page has been transcluded. Thank you! - Philippe | Talk 20:05, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Tulsa, Oklahoma Greetings, Philippe. I just wanted to let you know that I deleted your recent addition to the Tulsa article regarding the move to One Technology Center. I did this because we have been debating whether to include this in the article for a while and I had some reservations about it, which I have begun to discuss again on the talk page. I was wondering if you would like to participate in the discussion there. Again, sorry I removed your addition but as a featured article we just want to make absolutely sure that we resolve the issue of including the city hall move before entering it into the article. Normally I would never delete someone's contribution. On another note, I look forward to working with you on Taskforce Tulsa articles also, as I see you've listed your name on there. Thanks! And I apologize again. Okiefromokla•talk 22:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Sure, I'm happy to join you there. Thanks for the notification. - Philippe | Talk 00:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC) My dear Philippe My sweet, dear Philippe, I'm truly sorry I wasn't around when you sent me that beautful message, because I truly feel, with all my heart, that I have a precious friend in you too... and one that wasn't aware you weren't an admin yet, otherwise, I'd have nominated you myself! Fortunately, I'm in time to support you ;) It's truly beautiful to know you're around, sweetie - even if we don't talk everyday, I feel happier to feel you around me. Love you, lots, Phaedriel - 22:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 29 16 July 2007 About the Signpost From the editor: Filling in with a new feature Möller, Walsh retain seats; Brioschi elected British agency cites Wikipedia in denying F1 trademark Two new bureaucrats promoted Wikipedian bloggers launch "article rescue" effort Book review: The Cult of the Amateur WikiWorld comic: "Charles Lane" Wikipedia in the news Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 19:55, 19 July 2007 (UTC) Congratulations, your RfA was successful Congratulations on becoming an admin. I hereby present you with this Vandal whacking stick. May it serve you well. WjBscribe 09:33, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Congratulations, your RfA was successful and you are now a sysop! --Deskana (talk) 20:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC) Congratulations! Rlest 20:30, 20 July 2007 (UTC) Congratulations sir, it was an honour to have nominated you! You know where I am if you want any help, advice, or just want a little chit chat! Ryan Postlethwaite 21:40, 20 July 2007 (UTC) Congratulations from me! Acalamari 21:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC) You're welcome for the support. :) I am glad your RfA was successful. Acalamari 03:36, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Congrats on getting adminship. — Moe ε 04:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Congratulations, Philippe! Well done :) Sorry I missed your RFA, though - I was away. Support :) - Alison ☺ 07:20, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Better late than never!! Thanks for the nice words. - Philippe | Talk 07:21, 21 July 2007 (UTC) I was honored to participate in the RfA if such a great user.  Tcrow777  talk  07:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Hey, congratulations! Good luck with it all :) ~ Riana ⁂ 08:15, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Glad you made it, Phillipe. Good luck! —Anas talk? 14:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Woo, congratulations! I would give you a random image, but someone beat me too it. *shakes fist at WJB* Giggy UCP 00:57, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Request Could you please move Lists of topics over to Wikipedia:Lists of topics? This is a incorrect location for a Wikipedia namespace page to be located, and this certainly isn't an article. — Moe ε 04:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Curious Is it possible to salt an article's talk pages? -WarthogDemon 04:23, 21 July 2007 (UTC) It can be done, but I'd have to be convinced pretty hard.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 04:24, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loserz Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loserz (second nomination) Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_July_13#Loserz Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive271#Ripster40 Loserz Webcomic And the deletion log of Loserz itself. Seems they have a hard time taking "no" for an answer here. I'd also point to minor IP vandalisms, but these are the major things... Good enough? :P -WarthogDemon 04:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC) It's sure something I'll look at. Which article talk are you thinking of specifically? - Philippe | Talk 04:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC) The talk pages of Loserz and Loserz Webcomic respectively. As well as any talk page of any derivations they come up with. I'm wondering if that'll (finally) discourage them. -WarthogDemon 04:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC) I salted Talk:Loserz, because it's been deleted a ton. I'm loathe to salt Talk:Loserz Webcomic because I only see one delete on it. I know they're persistent, and I'll watch it... if it gets deleted again, I'll salt it. I'm hoping they'll just leave it alone, and we don't have to have a created and salted page sitting around out there. If I miss it and it comes back, let me know and I'll get at it then.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 04:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC) I'll do that. Thanks. :) -WarthogDemon 17:08, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks Thank you for blocking User:172.207.17.93. Angel Of Sadness T/C 16:26, 21 July 2007 (UTC) You're welcome! - Philippe | Talk 16:28, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Addiction Foods I would like this article reinstated. It was wrong for User:Nuttah68 to place for speedy deletion when a discussion could have fixed whatever problem he has with it. Addiction Foods is the only pet food manufacturer lon the planet using kangaroo and common brushtail possum as a primary meat. Noles1984 16:37, 21 July 2007 (UTC) FYI, I've been discussing the process of asserting notability with Noles1984 at User talk:Leebo#Notability, and I restored Addiction Foods with a hangon tag so he can contest the deletion with sources. Leebo T/C 17:41, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Works for me, thanks for stepping in! - Philippe | Talk 18:26, 21 July 2007 (UTC) Paul Inder Would Paul Inder be good for an afd? -WarthogDemon 03:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Yah, I think I'd AfD it. There's enough there that it's not a speedy, I don't think, but I don't think notability is firmly established. - Philippe | Talk 03:15, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Consider it afdified. :) -WarthogDemon 03:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Speedy deletion? Hi, I'm new. I created the page Ernie's House of Whoop Ass and someone marked it as speedy deletion. I tried to add the hangon tag and added my rationale to the Talk page for the article, but you deleted the page in very short time period between the hangon edit and my submission of a Talk comment. First, I disagree with the deletion and feel the article might not have been deleted if you had heard my reasoning. Second, the extremely short time between then notification of speedy deletion and the time I posted the Talk comment was way too short. I do not understand how anyone new to Wikipedia could feel welcome to enter the huge and mysterious process editing Wikipedia seems to be if I do not even get the chance to defend my edits or get the courtesy of a helpful explanation. Sure, after the speedy deletion edit, I received an explanation of how to counter the tag, but I wasn't allowed enough time to counter the tag before the article was deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Impmope (talk • contribs) Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm sorry the experience has been frustrating for you - I hope I can help you out some. The reason I deleted the article is because it failed our notability standards. If you read our notability policy, it explains what we consider to be appropriately notable for inclusion in the encyclopedia, and unfortunately, nothing in the article struck me as particularly unusual or notable. If you'd like to draft an article and then let me know where it is, I can glance at it before you post it and provide you with suggestions that might help out. I strongly suggest, though, that you begin by reading our notability standards. I'm also going to drop a quick "welcome" notice on your userpage that might give you some good hints. - Philippe | Talk 03:29, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Information graffiti I would ask you to reconsider verbose censorship. I am not sure you even comprehend what you delete. The irony is this; you are expressing yourself by your imposition the validation of the subject matter. These ideas will prevail with or without you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugewindow (talk • contribs) <grin> You're right... it MUST be that I deleted it because I didn't understand the concept. All those pesky ideas and things. The thing is, Wikipedia isn't a place for original research - it's an encyclopedia. In fact, we even have a rule about that: WP:OR. - Philippe | Talk 03:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair! I have posted something at WP:RFC/N. Take a look if you like. Cheers, -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 04:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Great! I'll keep an eye on it, I'm curious to see what folks think. I'd particularly like to see discussion that doesn't center around the last-edit date, because something similar to this is likely to come up again, and I'm curious how the community feels. - Philippe | Talk 04:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Vandal whacking stick. What surface would this vandals be defacing? oh...right! I get it! Enjoy stroking your ego in a very un orginal manner. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hugewindow (talk • contribs). Well, that's probably up to the vandal, isn't it? But then, it's your mind that took you there... <grin> I'm sorry that you and I don't agree on that article. I hope you'll take the time to read a couple of our policies (the policy on notability and the policy on original research) and maybe have another go at it. I'd be happy to scan something before you posted it to be sure that it was appropriate to our purposes, if you want. In any case, please remember to sign your talk page comments by putting four tildes (~~~~) at the end of them. That makes it easier for us to sort through who left what. - Philippe | Talk 04:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC) self importance I will leave you to swoon over your abilty; get back to me in a few years. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hugewindow (talk • contribs). OK, I'll make a mark of it on my calendar. Best to ya. - Philippe | Talk 04:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC) The Kush I know this article was deleted before. Someone rewrote it and I added a cites from XXL (magazine) stating the release date and tracklisting. Is that not considered a reliable source? It is indeed a major magazine. MrBlondNYC 13:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Hi - the issue in this case wasn't so much reliable sources, it's that the article went through a valid articles for deletion process. Once it goes through that, and the community decides that it should be deleted, the best way to bring it back is to first approach the original deleting admin (in this case User:Daniel Case, I think) and see if he'll bring it back to let you work on it. If that doesn't work, send it through deletion review. Otherwise, we'd just have people re-creating articles all over the place. If you think you can source it (and I'd go with more than one reliable source - people usually want to see multiple reliable sources), you can mention that at the deletion review. Without a valid DRV or Admin agreement, you're probably going to see the article continually deleted, because admins are going to take very seriously the community's wishes from AfD. Hope this helps some... if you have any other questions, let me know. I'll help you any way that I can. - Philippe | Talk 13:19, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Anti-tank dog I reverted your deletion of Anti-tank dog. I'd been reading the source given and the text didn't seem to match up exactly. There's also the fact that it gave the Wikipedia article, which predated it by a year, as a source. Let me know if you disagree. Leithp 18:10, 22 July 2007 (UTC) I don't disagree, and in fact, had just changed my mind and was un-deleting it when I got notice that it had already been done. - Philippe | Talk 18:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC) DJ-Kicks: Tiga Why was this deleted? I can see there a was a "db-spam" tag on it, but what led you to think it was spam?--P4k 00:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC) I deleted it because I saw no notability in the article. It appears to be one article by an artist with no assertion of notability. - Philippe | Talk 02:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC) You mean you deleted it because you saw no assertion of notability in Tiga's article? Tiga (musician) asserts notability in several ways: several of his singles have reached the top 100 on national charts (criteria 2), he's won a Juno Award (criteria 8), he's produced "widely known" remixes, he's collaborated with notable people, etc. Even if you feel that article doesn't assert notability, I think that being part of a notable compilation series (DJ-Kicks) should establish the album's notability in the same way that being by a notable artist would. Are you planning to delete Tiga (musician) as well?--P4k 02:48, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Honestly, hadn't looked that closely at it. I'll evaluate it though. I'm curious, though, why this article is not included in a discography section on the artist's article though? - Philippe | Talk 02:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC) It is.--P4k 02:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC So why do we have a separate article about it? I'm not asking leading questions, I'm genuinely curious. - Philippe | Talk 02:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC) It's linked from Tiga's article, I'm not saying all of the content in DJ-Kicks: Tiga is reproduced in Tiga (musician). Are you saying that you think it would be better to include all the content on the album article on Tiga's page? Personally I think having a seperate article is a better way to divide the information; that way people who aren't interesting in reading the tracklist or whatever don't have to scroll past it, and it's easier to link to from other articles. It just seems more well-organized to me. The thing is, this is actually irrelevant. If your concern is notability then you shouldn't have deleted the article; albums aren't covered under csd a7.--P4k 03:04, 23 July 2007 (UTC) I tell you what - I encourage you to take it to DRV. I'll abide by the community's feelings. It's entirely possible I'm not totally calibrated to them. - Philippe | Talk 05:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Done. FYI this has been an extremely frustrating experience.--P4k 05:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC) I know this will sound flip or placating, and I hope you understand my sincerity when I say that I'm sorry that's the case. I really am. I don't want anyone to have a frustrating experience on wiki, that's not what we're here for. In all fairness, I tend to be a little deletionist in my outlook, and I really don't want to get into a theoretical discussion, that's why I invited you to take it to DRV. I appreciate that you took the time to bring it to the deleting admin, and that you were willing to engage in discussion about it (and initiated the discussion). Again, I'm sorry it was frustrating for you. - Philippe | Talk 06:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks.--P4k 21:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Abby Abadi Just to give you a heads up, I'm planning to take this speedy deletion to DRV soon. I've already partly discussed this on tagger Ten Pound Hammer's RfA, where I and Paxse have given reasons why we thought it shouldn't have been deleted (we're opposes #10 and #13). To add to those, her raw Ghit count of about 20K[2] is pretty good considering that a) Malaysia is a country with a smaller population and is less wired, and b) her peak of popularity seems to have been around 2000-2002, and she's also got 50 News Archive hits[3]. This, combined with her "Most Popular TV Actress" ABP Awards, seems to show that she's a popular actress in Malaysia. I'll hold off for at least a few hours to give you a chance to undelete it yourself, if this has changed your mind. --Groggy Dice T | C 18:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Groggy Dice, thank you for doing me the courtesy of notifying me that you intended to take it to DRV. I appreciate that, very much. I've just reviewed the previously deleted version of the article and see no assertion of notability - the article was basically just a list of a few films that she acted in, with no discussion about critical laud, awards, or even whether the roles were major. There's nothing in the article to suggest notability, so I think that I'm going to stand by my deletion. However, I looks forward to seeing the discussion at DRV, and wish you the best in this and all your editing. - Philippe | Talk 18:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC) An editor has asked for a deletion review of Abby Abadi. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Groggy Dice T | C 03:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC) George No, thank you.  :) Corvus cornix 21:15, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Wait. You only blocked him for one hour?! Corvus cornix 21:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Yeah, initially, but I've changed my mind. He's getting "vandalism only." - Philippe | Talk 21:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Fire star beat me to it. He's indefinite now. - Philippe | Talk 21:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Greetings! Yep, I saw in his user history an interest in vandalising football articles in general and George Elokobi in particular, so I gave him a username hardblock. Cheers! --Fire Star 火星 21:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks to both of you. Corvus cornix 21:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Eh, I'm football illiterate, and the George Elokobi thing went right over my head. Had I seen that, I'd have done indefinite from the beginning. Should have anyway, I was being way too nice. - Philippe | Talk 21:23, 23 July 2007 (UTC) It is better to err on the side of caution, anyway. You stopped the depredation long enough for us to actually investigate instead of just cleaning his messes... --Fire Star 火星 01:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks Thank you for blocking User:Igotflab and User:Lumpy logs. Angel Of Sadness T/C 21:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC) No problem, thanks for keeping an eye out! - Philippe | Talk 21:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Hello Im not sure if this is where im supposed to post but you block my other account AntiGayAllegiance for supposally adding more promotional content. well what i did was i deleted everything from the page so it was blank and you could delete it. I didn't add anything i just deleted everything. Please unblock my other account AntiGayAllegiance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AntiGayAlliegence (talk • contribs). I assure you, I'm not going to unblock your other account. Your usernames are defamatory and offensive, and thus prohibited by WP:U. - Philippe | Talk 01:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Speedy deletions On what basis did you delete E-JASL: The Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship ? The reasons say db-A7 ad, but there is no such category, and hoax, and hoaxes are no speediable. Possibly you meant db as web content without an assertion of notability? Possible G11, advertisement? In either case, please undelete so I can fix the tone, for its perfectly real, and indexed in the major indexing service in the field, as it says right in the article. On what basis did you delete Dr. Urmila Pachouri and Dr. Pramod Pachouri ? You deleted as A7, but the article asserts notability. I agree the notability is quite doubtful, but a prod would have been appropriate , or an afd. Andrew Smith (Mens Fashion Designer) also asserts notability. again, a prod would have been appropriate. Princess consort of Monaco is a short list, and there is no reason to think it so un-encylopedic as to be worth a speedy. If its controversial, it has to go to afd, and such lists are always controversial. Victor Vinatonni dbA7 only applies to real people, not fictional ones. Please recheck WP:CSD. and so on. I only mention a few. I know you're new at this. I know that there are different attitudes, and I also know that some people tend to think me reluctant to delete articles, but if you will look at my delete log you'll see otherwise. We are supposed to investigate speedies before deleting, we are not supposed to just go on the word of the person who placed he tag, and I do not see how anyone can do 1 per minute and get them all right. Let me suggest that you go more cautiously at first. You dont have to clear out everything yourself. When I started, i started with the really obvious. Even so, a couple of more experienced admins spoke to me quite sharply about what I had thought was obvious. DGG (talk) 01:47, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Thank you for taking the time to ask. I appreciate it. I'd like to say that while these might have had the action taken within a minute, through the beauty of multiple browser tabs, I do, in fact, investigate them before I do anything with them. I'm not fond of your implication that I don't investigate the speedies - in fact, I do, but I appreciate that you took the time to come to me with your concerns and I thank you for that. I will take a look at these at some point tonight as I'm doing some other work, and will get your some answers. In the meantime, I'll absolutely undelete E-JASL for you as you request. - Philippe | Talk 01:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Your Toolbox On you user page, you have a toolbox with alot of different functions and wikipedia code on them. Do you mind if I use your toolbox as a references when i am editing articles and looking for templates.? also, is it possible to copy the toolbox onto my userpage (ill make one of those sub-page thingies or whatever they're called so that it doesn't appear on my userpage.) I can reference you aswell if you grant me the permission to use it. Thank you for your time. GBenemy (talk) 04:07, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Well, you can borrow it, sure... but I can't claim credit for it, I stole it from User:FisherQueen, who stole it from User:Fuhghettaboutit, so that's where I'd go for the most up to date version of it. It's an incredibly helpful toolkit, isn't it? I know that User:Fuhghettaboutit doesn't mind having it distributed. Good luck to you! - Philippe | Talk 04:10, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks for your help :D it's almost as useful as the TWINKLE user script :D...GBenemy (talk) 04:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Love me some Twinkle. But if you like that, check out VandalProof. - Philippe | Talk 04:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Looks good, I'll check it out, thanks for the info :D GBenemy (talk) 05:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 30 23 July 2007 About the Signpost WikiWorld comic: "World domination" News and notes: "The Wikipedia Story", visa ruling, milestones Wikipedia in the news Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC) re: Bio Pages Which article are you talking about? Kolindigo 22:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Looks like it was Boonswang - members of the family may be notable as individuals, but the family as a group is not. - Philippe | Talk 22:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC) I didn't make that page. ??? Kolindigo 22:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Eh, you're totally right. You just tagged it for speedy. Sorry about that, I fired the macro at the wrong person! Thanks for pointing it out. - Philippe | Talk 22:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC) No problem. :) Kolindigo 22:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Julisa kardasian I'm not sure what to do with this: Julisa kardasian. Should I give the user a conflict of interest warning? -WarthogDemon 23:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC) I'd start with that, and a point to WP:BLP. I might also run it through AFD and see what they think about it. I think the claim of notability is sketchy at best, and would also like to see some references. Good catch. - Philippe | Talk 23:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Forgive me for bothering you again. I just sent you an email and am in need of some help here. -WarthogDemon 02:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC) No worries, I'll check my email and reply. - Philippe | Talk 02:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC) Thank you. I think I've figured something out so I sent one more. :) -WarthogDemon 02:42, 25 July 2007 (UTC) One more thing. -WarthogDemon 03:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC) why why did you delete the andre nickatina article...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.104.140.32 (talk • contribs) I didn't. According to the Deletion Log: JlaTondre did, at 17:17 on 22 July. - Philippe | Talk 02:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC) PLEASE Can't you just keep the article A Second To Last, I did everything I could for it. Maybe you can help me out with it. I spent WAY too long on it for you to just delete it. I read the guidelines, and I don't see anything for why it got deleted. Help me out, it took me 4 hours to create that page, and you deleted it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Travis0123456789 (talk • contribs) I'm sorry you worked that hard on a page that isn't suitable for Wikipedia. My concern with A Second To Last is that they do not meet Wikipedia's notability standards for a band or musical group. If you can satisfy that they meet any of the standards listed there, I'd be glad to help you make the article demonstrate that. - Philippe | Talk 03:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC) Cage the Elephant An editor has asked for a deletion review of Cage the Elephant. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Jmaurer2 05:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks for letting me know. :-) - Philippe | Talk 05:03, 25 July 2007 (UTC) Matt Miller (musician) This page was just deleted, since it was noted to be with the "speedy" designation and all. I understand it is your job to delete these as they come up, so I don't really have an issue with that. However, I was looking up info to add to the page, (which i probably shouldve labeled as a musician stub to being with) when it was deleted. He is the only member of the band he performs with that does not have a wiki page. How much info/sources/links should be gathered up before submitting the initial article so it doesnt get marked for speedy deletion? And how long should I wait before resubmitting the article? Ocstat 04:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Hi - Since you were working on the page while it got deleted, I recreated it for you in your userspace - you can find the page at User:Ocstat/Matt Miller. If you want to continue to work on it, and then let me know I'll be glad to take a look at it before you move it back into main space and give you suggestions. Generally speaking, you're going to want multiple reliable sources that will establish notability for musicians. I know that's fairly broad, but I'm not sure exactly what's out there on this guy, so it's hard to answer specifically. Keep working on it, then let me know and I'll take a look at it before it's moved into mainspace and hopefully that will keep it live. Thanks! - Philippe | Talk 04:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Thank you for saving the page for me. I'll try to spice it up a bit before submitting it again. I took a look at the notability for musicians link, and while Matt Miller doesnt nessecarilly meet those requirements himself, the band he performs with, Sparta does. So, basically, the article just needs some more information, correct? Ocstat 04:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Well, in a case like that, I'd be more inclined to suggest that you fold all the musicians' individual pages into the band page - otherwise, you always run the risk of someone saying that he doesn't meet the notability requirements and starting this process over. If you can write it clearly enough that he as a member of the band clearly meets them, you stand a shot though. I'm happy I could help you out. Let me know if you want me to take a look at it. - Philippe | Talk 04:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC) I think the page is just about done, if you would like to take a look at it and tell me if it is up to par, that would be greatly appreciated!Ocstat 07:48, 26 July 2007 (UTC) You've made some definite improvements to the page, thank you for doing that. If I may make one suggestion, though, it's to include in the lead paragraph (maybe right after you mention Sparta) something that establishes their notability. Sparta is the first band to win 1,000 awards in one night... or something of that nature - whatever it is that satisfies WP:MUSIC for them. After that, I think we may be headed the right direction. - Philippe | Talk 15:13, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Ok I am pretty sure the page now meets the requirements set for it. It would be appreciated if you could take one last look. Thanks again!Ocstat 21:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC) <outdent> - I made a couple of changes to bump the assertion of notability up in the article - it was kind of buried. Feel free to revert them if you think it kills the flow. I think there's enough there to survive speedy, based on both the charted hit and the international tour. In fact, based on WP:MUSIC I absolutely support keeping this article now. I'll reverse my previous judgment and put it out in mainspace now. Thanks! You've been a great help! Ocstat 23:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC) DJ-Kicks: Tiga This article, which you deleted on 22 July for A11, has been restored, word-for-word, by User: Phil Sandifer, on 26 July. I concur with your decision to delete and ask that you revisit the page and reverse the undelete. All any reader need do is read the article and s/he will see content that sounds like it was lifted from a press release or the album cover, i.e., blatant advertising. Thank you. 72.76.2.169 11:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Since the page has been through a valid deletion review, I am satisfied that our process has been upheld. I'm not willing to get into a delete/undelete war over this one. Obviously there were people who thought it belonged, including admins, so while I still am not sure it does, I'm not going to re-delete the page. At this point, the best choice is to send it through AfD if you feel strongly about it. Thanks! - Philippe | Talk 15:10, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Gothus Arcane Page was deleted. I know why it was according to the policy. But how then does a music band for instance get theri info into wiki? I added the author's info to look and sound just like a band profile. What needs to be done. Something of importance? Won't being the first and only "heavy metal author and novelist" be of importance enough to be warrented? Frostlands 15:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Frostlands Hi Frostlands - you may want to read Wikipedia's standards for notability of a band. It tells what makes a band notable enough for inclusion into the encyclopedia. Does the band fit those standards? If so, draft a page about them in your own userspace, and then let me know and I'll look at it and tell you whether I think it's a strong enough statement of notability to justify their inclusion in the encyclopedia. If you put it up before there's appropriate notability evidence listed, chances are it will keep getting deleted until we simply won't allow the page to be created any more. - Philippe | Talk 16:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Scottsdale Center Did you speedy delete Scottsdale Center as it now says you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scottsdale Center and at User talk:TenPoundHammer in the section "Getting too hasty in closing AFDs," and if so why can't I find it in your contribution history or the edit history for the AFD? Thanks. Edison 20:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Found where you speedied it while it was up for AFD [4]. When you speedy delete an article which is already up for AFD, please also note that action in the AFD, because otherwise there is some confusion about who deleted it, and other editors have to make the appropriate changes to the AFD. For some reason, speedy deletions do not show up in an admin's contribution history. Thanks. Edison 21:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Eh, yeah, that's my fault. I forgot to note on the AfD that I closed it. So sorry. Glad it all got sorted out. - Philippe | Talk 22:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC) User talk:TenPoundHammer is quite a Wikignome, running around noting that AFDs have been speedy deleted, but sometimes it looks like he is the one who did the speedy deletion, when he is only exercising the mop with great diligence, but without being an admin. Edison 04:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Re I apologize for that. I realized that the comment was too harsh and in violation of WP:NPA, and was about to change it when you issued the block, thus you saw the original version. Thank you for blocking him in any case. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 22:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC) No worries, the world goes on. Have a great day! - Philippe | Talk 22:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC) Re: Hockey team - Malaysia I am gonna revert the move u made. If u see Category:National field hockey teams, the naming convention is as it was earlier, ie: without capital letters. Cheers.. kawaputratok2me 03:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Okie dokie. - Philippe | Talk 04:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC) CONQUEST! The Ultimate Trojan Experience Can you reinstate that page as it is not a club, company. It is an event that holds a big historical significance in the USC-UCLA rivalry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eclongshot (talk • contribs) I'm sorry, no - it's a group of people participating in an event that has not, for the purposes of the encyclopedia, been demonstrated to hold notability. If you can demonstrate, using reliable third party sources that this event has significance to the greater world, I'd be happy to look at it with you. Unfortunately, I don't see any reason at this point that it should be included. Does the event have greater historical value? Greater sociological value? Is it something that we as a culture can learn from? If you can honestly answer those questions "yes", then I'll be happy to move the page to your userspace for you so that you can continue to work on the article - then, once you think it's ready for inclusion, I'd be glad to tell you whether I believe it meets the notability standards before you move it back to the encyclopedia. However, I can tell you now that I have my doubts about whether this event will ever qualify for inclusion. - Philippe | Talk 13:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC) douch bag Thats you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugewindow (talk • contribs) Good lord, at least spell it right. Blocked. - Philippe | Talk 15:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Nicola Legrottaglie sprotection tag Thank you for the semi-protection on this page. You added a notice on the talk page for Nicola Legrottaglie. I took the liberty of adding sprotected tag to the article's page, igf you don't mind. Thanks. Alexf(t/c) 15:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Thank you, I got distracted and didn't do that. - Philippe | Talk 15:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Jason Kevin Dunn Hi. I noticed you speedily deleted this article, and I was just wondering why one wouldn't consider being a member of a notable band to be at least an assertion of notability. Having removed one of the wikilinks from the band's article, you were obviously aware of this. --Maxamegalon2000 15:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks for bringing this to my attention. That particular article page caught my attention when it was tagged for speedy delete - it appeared to have almost no content, and frankly, I missed the sentence that he was the lead singer for a particular band. What was missing altogether was any explanation of why that band is notable, which would make sense in this article. However, all that is required is proof of why HE is notable, which there clearly was. I'll reinstate the article. As to the wikilink, it's removed automatically by my script tool (Twinkle) when I delete a page - I didn't actually ever see the Hawk Nelson article... no conspiracy theories, please. :-) When I reinstate the article, though, I'm going to strip out the extraneous, non-encyclopedic and unsourced material. - Philippe | Talk 15:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Just don't let anyone know I did it -- I'll lose my rep as a deletionist.  ;) (I do think the best thing is to redirect to the main article since there's not much about the person that can be said that is verifiable, but ... eh.) -- Merope 15:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Yeah, let's give 'em a chance to flesh it out first though. Who knows, maybe they can turn it into a really good article? If'n it stays a stub for too long though, I think a redirect might be in order. - Philippe | Talk 15:53, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks. I've actually put the AfD tag back, because I'm as unsure as you guys are about whether he merits an article or not, but I'm reasonably sure he's not a speedy candidate. --Maxamegalon2000 16:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Actually, the AfD tag really should come off, because that AfD was closed. If we want to renominate him, we need to start from scratch, but that AfD tag leads to the OLD afd. You were right, he wasn't a speedy candidate. - Philippe | Talk 16:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Hmm. OK. --Maxamegalon2000 16:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the restoration. I was curious about the closing myself. I actually would have liked to have seen the AfD continue, as I am curious about bands and notability. I would assume that if a band is notable, the members would have to inherit that notability. A band wouldn't be as such, without members, just as a record cannot be notable without the band inheriting the notability. Any thoughts? the_undertow talk 18:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC) My gut feeling is that the band itself is notable (and thus entitled to an article) but the members of the band do not automatically inherit that notability. So, if the member has done anything in particular to gain notability (ie, Bono), they get a page. If not, the band gets a page with all the members listed in sections thereon. Again, that's nothing but gut feeling and I'd like to see it play out. - Philippe | Talk 18:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC) I guess my train of thought is different. What makes the band members notable is the fact that they are members of a notable band. the_undertow talk 19:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC) You know, it's almost a "chicken/egg" situation, isn't it? What came first, the band or the players? And which is more important? None of them are notable without the band, but the band doesn't exist without the players. - Philippe | Talk 19:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC) You just blew my mind. This really should be a situation to propose a modification to WP:BAND if we could find the forum to gather consensus. the_undertow talk 20:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC) BIMUN Could you please tell me why the article has been deleted? Thanks for your help! Are you sure that's the title? I can't find an article titled that. - Philippe | Talk 19:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Sorry, the correct title is "BIMUN - Bonn International Model United Nations" the log said "06:07, 27 July 2007 Philippe (Talk | contribs) deleted "BIMUN - Bonn International Model United Nations" Thanks, that helps. I deleted it because it's an article about a group or club that does not meet Wikipedia's standards for notability. If you believe that you have reliable sources that could demonstrate notability for this group, I'd be happy to un-delete it to your userspace so that you can work on it. Once that's done, if you'd let me know, I could look over it and determine whether I believe it meets our requirements before you move it back to Main-space. However, I'd warn you that it would really take some considerable press coverage to meet those requirements for this group, I think. - Philippe | Talk 19:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC) Yes, please un-delete it to my userspace so I can work on it and add sources. Thanks! Can you recheck again? Can you recheck again about the block of User:Forgettable ben? User:Forgettable ben is a likely sockpuppet of User:Ron liebman. User:Ronald liebman and User:Ronald liebman V are confirmed sockpuppets of User:Ron liebman (see both of their block log). Notice the similarities of these edits... here at Autocomfirm Proposal where Ronald liebman edits here again at Autoconfirmed Proposal where Forgettable ben edits Please recheck whether a block is appropriate or not.--PrestonH 01:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC) See, these are the kind of important details that would help at AIV. :-) Sure, I'm blocking him now. I had no idea who you thought he was a sockpuppet from the report. - Philippe | Talk 01:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC) Ultraman549 Only reason I went straight to AIV is that his editing patterns looked similar to one of our favorite on-wiki puppet shows, JB196 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Especially per this diff. Blueboy96 03:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC) I absolutely understand - I'm loathe to block without issuing any warnings though - if we both keep an eye on him, and he keeps it up, let me know and I'll indef block. - Philippe | Talk 03:49, 28 July 2007 (UTC) Surprise! Hulk Hogan has visited you! Hulk "somehow" promotes WikiLove and wants you to be happy today, and hopefully he has managed to make your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Come on now, go and make someone happy today, or Hulk will hug you till you choke, dear Philippe! :) Happy editing! - Phaedriel - 12:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks! My RFA User:TenPoundHammer and his romp of Wikipedia-editing otters thank you for participating in Hammer's failed request for adminship, and for the helpful tips given to Hammer for his and his otters' next run at gaining the key. Also, Hammer has talked to the otters, and from now on they promise not to leave fish guts and clamshells on the Articles for Deletion pages anymore. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 16:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC) Thank you! :) Thank you for your beautiful words and warm wishes on my birthday, dear Philippe! I took a well-deserved one-day wikibreak and spent it with my family and my friends... and actually had a beer after months of forced abstinence! :) Of course, there's no way I'd forget about you, so I saved a great, tasty piece of chocolate cake just for you - but sorry, no beer left! Again, thank you so much for taking the time to wish me well, and have a wonderful day, my friend! Love, Phaedriel - 12:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC) In the short time we've shared, the small seed of friendship we sowed months ago has already become a charming, beautiful flower, my dear Philippe. May you have a wonderful vacation, and rest assured I'll be eagerly waiting for your return! :) Lots of xxx, Sharon User:Picapole Hi, regarding my reporting him at AIV: I can understand why you wouldn't want to block him, but since other users had given him a "final warning", I didn't really want to warn him again with out reporting him. I wouldn't characterize his edits at Lars Larson as "good-faith" or a content dispute, however. We would be willing to hear why he wants to make those changes (even after a particulary POV edit that was removed) but even after numerous attempts to get him to communicate, all he does is revert. Incidentally several of us previously reverted edits following a similar pattern from a user with a different agenda. diff. I don't think any of us who revert the edits to that article are fans of the subject by any stretch of the imagination, but Picapole seems bent on showing Larson in a negative light. And there is a bit of a difference between "conservative" and "right-wing". Any suggestions besides continuing to monitor the article? Katr67 21:10, 30 July 2007 (UTC) Hi Katr67 - thanks for taking the time to contact me. I hope I can explain my reasoning, and maybe we can come up with a solution... first, when I say that the edits are "good-faith", that's a very particular definition for this purpose - that is, the edit is not intended to cause vandalism. Vandalism, for the purposes of administrative actions, can only consist of edits that are intended to do harm, or are so egregious that they actually do hard to the wiki. On WP:AIV, we intercede to protect the wiki. So, given that, POV edits are not automatically vandalism, though in some cases they can be. I know it's frustrating to have to keep monitoring that page and reverting him, and frankly, if it continues too much longer I'll probably get it through my skull that it really is vandalism, but for now I'm assuming good faith. There may be another admin who would take action on it, but I tend to be fairly cautious. I'd encourage you to try out one of our dispute resolution steps - they may serve as the strong wake-up call that is needed here. In the meantime, I'll add the article to my watchlist and keep an eye on things - unfortunately, that doesn't do a great deal of immediate good, since I'm leaving the country tomorrow and won't have internet access for a bit, but I can check on it when I get back, and there are several other admins who have my talk page on their watchlist and I know they'll keep an eye on things as well. - Philippe | Talk 21:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC) Hi Philippe, thanks for your quick response. I get exactly what you're saying. I think our previous vandal/POV pusher on that article was reverting more quickly and agressively, thus when reported at AIV, he was blocked--several times, which was indeed a wake-up call. I've seen this sort of slow edit war thing before and with an editor who won't communicate, mediation and the like don't seem to be much help. The thing is, they usually get bored and go away at some point, but it sure is tedious waiting them out. I did leave him/her a bit more personalized message asking for some cooperation, sometimes that does the trick... Have a nice trip! Katr67 21:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC) Punitive vs. preventative? Re your comment "This user's last edit to that page was on 7/29. Any action taken now would be punitive, rather than preventative. Decline block." When would a block be preventative? Before someone has ever edited? That's a little impossible. How in the name of all that is holy can you prevent continued removals of tags without blocking? Valrith 21:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC) HI Valrith: Administrators on WP:AIV are charged with enforcing Wikipedia's blocking policy, which, in its second sentence, says: Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, not to punish users. So, a block is preventative when we see an ongoing pattern of damaging vandalism that is likely to continue and do damage to the wiki. In a case like that, I would block in order to protect the wiki from further harm. In the case that you're dealing with - the removal of maintenance tags - the wiki is actually not in grave danger, although it's terribly annoying, I know. We have a number of other methods available to calm things down - dispute resolution and request for page protection come to mind immediately. Instead, what I'll do in this case is to leave a message on the user's talk page asking them to discuss changes. Perhaps seeing it come from me will make a difference. If not, we can explore other options. Sorry this is frustrating for you. - Philippe | Talk 21:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC) Jean Thesman I did try to discuss the issue with Valrith, but he/she did not give any indication to reasons for posting the comments about reliable sources. I created the article and the sources listed are very reliable and verifiable. Valrith so far is the only editor to make a claim otherwise. I am willing and encouraging of peer/administrator review of my sources and an objective decision made, not one based solely on one reader's spurious judgement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwpoe (talk • contribs) I think the concern in this case is that all the references appear to be from either the author or her publisher. In such a case, there's danger that we could be crossing out of our NPOV. Is it possible to find additional sources that could be added? Is there critical review of Jean's work that could be cited? - Philippe | Talk 21:41, 30 July 2007 (UTC) There is very little written about Thesman, which is why I limited the article so drastically, and it makes no extraordinary claims about her or her life. Surely the fact that she has won some awards and her current home as recorded by major publishers can't be worthy of objection. I suppose the individual awards can be tracked down, but that seems capricious in that I haven't seen other authors require that level of sourcing.--Alwpoe 21:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC) Hmpf. So you're not yet on Wikibreak, you're up as late as I am, and you're blocking the vandals I was about to block. Hmpf. -- Merope 06:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC) I needed SOMETHING to do while I was waiting for the laundry! I'm packing! Hey, can you review my block of User talk:Apocalidiot? He was vandalizing, I zapped him for 24, and then he started adjusting the block notice, etc, to make it look like I was actually unblocking him. And doing it badly! So, I took him to indef for vandal-only account. Now he's whining. I don't mind if you reduce it if you think it should be, but someone other than I ought to review the block probably. - Philippe | Talk 06:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Looks like another insomniac beat me to it -- Can't sleep, clown will eat me indef-blocked and protected the page. Seems reasonable. -- Merope 06:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Monika Dutt this seemed like a fairly clear assertion of N to me, whether or not it would have held up at AfD, and as one admin to another, you might want to consider whether it should have been deleted. I suggest you might want to look at the talk page of the editor who listed it for deletion. There seem to be well-justified complaints of POINT, & I would be very cautious with any of his nominations. DGG (talk) 07:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks for your comment and sugestion. I looked at it again after receiving your comment: I'm not sure I see an assertion of notability as required by WP:N - specifically, for politicians, Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislatures. The way I read the article she doesn't hold office, she holds the candidacy for office, through a run-off election. As you know, we don't typically list every candidate for office. In any case, I'm headed out of the country in about 10 minutes, so you're welcome to revert and undelete if you feel strongly about it. - Philippe | Talk 13:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007. Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315 The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 31 30 July 2007 About the Signpost From the editor: Another experiment and Wikimania Report on Citizendium Response: News from Citizendium User resigns admin status amid allegations of sock puppetry WikiWorld comic: "Mr. Bean" Wikipedia in the news Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:22, 4 August 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 32 6 August 2007 About the Signpost Committee makes statement on U.S. chapter About: The Wikipedia Plays Review: The Wikipedia Plays WikiWorld comic: "Terry Gross" News and notes: Similpedia, milestones Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 33 13 August 2007 About the Signpost CC 3.0 licenses accepted on Commons Reviewing five software requests WikiWorld comic: "2000s" News and notes: Meetup, milestones Wikipedia in the news Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC) Block Why was this user blocked with the only reason being his name, which can be changed. He made two good faith edits before the block, which he wasn't warned about beforehand. This is a serious case of biting newcomers. I urge you to unblock him with an apology and ask him to change his name - Pheonix(talk) 19:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC) Hi Pheonix15, and thanks for asking... the user's name is in violation of WP:U, because it promotes a commercial enterprise, Engine Room Recordings. Because, in particular, this user was editing articles ABOUT that commercial enterprise, there's very real danger of this being either a role account engaged in promotional activity, or being a general promotional account, we generally block those, while at the same time leaving instructions for how to change the name. If this user changes their name, they can have their contributions follow them to the new name. I might clarify, also, that this one came in through Usernames for Administrator Attention. - Philippe | Talk 19:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC) Dog (disambiguation) protection I don't object to your protection (and I'm certainly not going to undo it), but I'm not sure why it's needed. Both IPs are blocked for 24 hours, and there was no activity on the page from August 10 until now. I think it may be worth shortening the protection to a week, but that's my opinion, as month seems a bit too long to me. I'll let you decide. Acalamari 23:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC) Yeah, I looked at the blocks - but since they're 24 hour blocks, I expect they'll be back. It seems to me that if we just sprotect the page, we don't really have to worry about the blocks... they'll be forced to register or leave it alone. If it were full protect, it's another thing - but sprotect is minimal damage in my mind. I'll drop the sprotect time back, though, you're probably right about that. - Philippe | Talk 00:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC) That's a reasonable length then. We'll leave it at that. :) Acalamari 01:40, 18 August 2007 (UTC) user:Zzuuzzmycock Hi ther; you just username blocked this editor. As his name is not only offensive in itself, but clearly derives from the name of a well-respected wiki admin, did you consider applying a hardblock? Just a thought - your call. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 22:08, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Yeah, I thought of it, but wasn't 100% sure the case was strong enough. Given that you thought the same thing, I'm going to modify to that. Thanks... I've never actually hardblocked on a username, and wasn't sure what the criteria were and didn't want to go overboard. - Philippe | Talk 22:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC) The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar I'm awarding you this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your great contributions to protecting and reverting attacks of vandalism on Wikipedia. Wikidudeman (talk) 22:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Hey, rock on - thanks!  :-) - Philippe | Talk 22:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks for semi-protecting my user talk page. NHRHS2010 Talk 22:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC) No worries, glad to help. - Philippe | Talk 22:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Protected redirects cat Hey. It's [[Category:Protected redirects]], not {{Category:Protected redirects}} :) --- RockMFR 23:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Bah, you're right. Brain freeze. - Philippe | Talk 23:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Protection conflicts Isn't it annoying when this happens? :) Acalamari 23:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Yeah... st00pid mediawiki... one of these days it will be able to just read our minds, eh? - Philippe | Talk 23:08, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Heh; that'd be funny. :) Acalamari 23:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Actually, I'm not so sure I want that. My mind can be a scary scary place sometimes. We'd need to start censoring. - Philippe | Talk 23:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Protection of White people Thanks for protecting the article; I'm not sure if we'll have reached consensus by a week, but I will inform you if we need more protection. Thanks again! Neranei (talk) 01:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks again! I am a new mediator, so I am hoping all goes well. Cheers, Neranei (talk) 01:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Swift response Thank you for your speedy block of Jgeortsis. That was the first time I saw a vandal working in real time. —Kanodin 04:33, 20 August 2007 (UTC) No problem - that guy was on my watchlist, and when I saw people showing up to scold him on his talk, I took a look at it. Thanks for your help! - Philippe | Talk 04:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC) I'm not sure that timed blocks are appropriate for this user. He is a vandalism-only account. Every one of his edits are either: Copy-and-paste: He copies the text from similarly named articles (or in one case, Encyclopedia Britannica) over the top of, or in the middle of existing articles. These cannot be simple misunderstandings. He took one of the "Marist Brothers" school pages, and pasted it over every other Marist Brothers article he could find internationally; or Signatures: He signs his name in the middle of articles, and sometimes changes his name in the signature to "MR X HACKER". As a truly vandalism-only account, I believe this should be an indef block. Mark Chovain 04:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC) He has been a bit of a nuisance, hasn't he? Let me do a more detailed look at his contributions and see if there's any reason to look at him as a good faith editor. If not, I'll consider an indef block (though, to be truthful, I hate them... but I know there are always cases where they make sense). - Philippe | Talk 04:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC) I normally don't like seeing them applied either, but I think some vandals pride themselves on seeing how long they can test our patience. Indef blocks seem less fun than a collection of n-day blocks. Your call. Mark Chovain 04:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC) You made a good case, and in his entire contribs, I don't see anything that allows me to AGF here. He's indef blocked. Thanks for pointing it out. - Philippe | Talk 04:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC) NP: Thanks for looking into it. I think he's got socks, too: Jgeorsis: [5] Test2007: [6](already indef blocked). It could be a coincidence, or a copy-cat, but I'm going to go take a look for more that haven't been blocked. Mark Chovain 05:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Good catch. These critters tend to travel in groups. Let me know what you find, please. - Philippe | Talk 05:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Will do. I can't find anything in a quick look, but will spend time tonight working out how he finds his targets (they're all Islam-related, but I don't yet know how he found them). Mark Chovain 05:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam? —Kanodin 06:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks much Thanks for being proactive, it's very much appreciated. (Especially since I'm still learning the wiki-ropes). --Bfigura (talk) 04:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC) No worries, that's what I'm here for. Welcome! - Philippe | Talk 04:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Protection at White people I understand that page protection was requested by the cabal mediator. The mediation cabal is not an official process and the mediator has no special rights to call for protection. This mediator is new to WP with about two months of significant editing -- not the experience level to take this case. This page got a bit out of control yesterday and protection was probably warranted; however, unprotecting should be affected as soon as things calm down, and not at the behest of unacceptable mediator. We already have several experienced admins on watch here. --Kevin Murray 12:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC) While I, of course, agree with you that medcab is not an official process, I independently verified that several of the active editors there were calling for page protection. Because of that, and the rather high level of activity there, I still believe that I made the right choice with protection. However, at the time, I consciously set the page protection for a relatively short period of time (only about a week). I am aware that there are several admins who are in that process, but one of them was one of the people calling for page protection and (wisely) suggesting that he should not be the one to handle the protection. Thank you for your interest, and for your suggestion - for now, I'm going to leave the protection as is, but other admins may choose to disagree with me. - Philippe | Talk 14:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC) No problem. I think that your choice was wise except where your edit summary inflates the status of an yet unaccepted informal mediation. I realize that admins must freeze the page as they find it, at least initially; however, I think that we lost some significant compromise sections especially the photo gallery which has been no easy task to bring to neutral and was removed by a transient editor shortly before protection. --Kevin Murray 14:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC) You're correct that admins would generally protect the page in whatever version they initially find it (the exception, of course, being if there were substantial vandalism to the page); one thing you might consider in this case is to use the talk page to determine if there is consensus to bring back things that were removed by the "transient editors" - if so, you could theoretically use the {{editprotected}} template to that they be put back in the article. You'll want to be sure that the discussion showing consensus is clearly available to the admin who would answer, but I can see where that could be used to get things back for you. - Philippe | Talk 15:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC) No 3RR violation I did not violate the 3RR rule as I'm editing constructively. You cannot just divide the editors into two camps and count all the edits by some editor as reversions. If you look at all my edits today on the Hamas and Hezbollah page you can clearly see that I've been busy trying to find a reasonable solution to the issues raised. Count Iblis 20:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC) You are quite correct, and if you check your talk page, you'll see that I had already removed the 3RR warning. It was issued in error, I clicked the wrong name. My apologies. - Philippe | Talk 20:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC) No problem :). Count Iblis 21:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC) B.t.w., my experience with the 3RR rule is that it is often used as a tactical weapon in edit wars. Only in case of disruptive newcomers and vandals is this rule any good. You now often see established editors just reverting without discussing much, just giving "rv" as edit summary, because they are "entitled to 3 reversions". This is not really true according to the 3RR page, but it does reflect the practice. Count Iblis 21:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC) 71.172.225.72 Last night 71.172.225.72 was banned for 24 hours, due to incivility. I just thought it should be mentioned that he recently posted this on his talk page. I think that action should be taken. --Mooshykris 22:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks, I protected his/her talk page and left a warning. - Philippe | Talk 22:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC) No Problem --Mooshykris 22:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Not remarkable? Philippe, I did not get to read the entry for my company Fair Trade Sports yet (do you still have it?), but please allow me to disagree with you that our new company is not remarkable. Here are three support points: First, we are the first (and only) sports gear company in the US making certified child labor-free sports balls (Fairtrade Labeling Organization). Second, we are the first (and only) sports gear company in the US making certified eco-friendly sports balls (Forest Stewardship Council). Third, we are the first (and only) sports gear company in the US giving away all our after-tax profits to children's charities - same as the Newman's Own brand (popcorn, salad dressing, etc). I'm not sure how the GoLite company can have an entry with nothing unique about them (although they do make great stuff - I love my gear from them), while our entry is deleted? Your thoughts? --ScottJames 22:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Hi ScottJames - good question. First, I hope you'll indulge me in thanking you for your commitment to fair trade and social justice. On a personal note, I appreciate it. I'll leave a copy of this on your talk page as well, just to be sure that you get it. To answer your question more specifically, though, Wikipedia has some fairly well established standards for notability, and in the incarnation I saw, the article about your company didn't seem to meet them. I'll be happy to restore the article and place it in your userspace somewhere (we can work out where) so that you can take some time to pull the article up to standard, and then I'll help you move it to the main wiki, if you can demonstrate that you've met those standards. Our standards say: A company, corporation, organization, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. Once notability is established, primary sources may be used to add content. Ultimately, and most importantly, all content must be attributable. The "secondary sources" in the criterion include reliable published works in all forms, such as (for examples) newspaper articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations1 except for the following: Press releases; autobiographies; advertising for the company, corporation, organization, or group; and other works where the company, corporation, organization, or group talks about itself—whether published by the company, corporation, organization, or group itself, or re-printed by other people.2 Self-published material or published at the direction of the subject of the article would be a primary source and falls under a different policy. Works carrying merely trivial coverage; such as (for examples) newspaper articles that simply report meeting times or extended shopping hours, or the publications of telephone numbers, addresses, and directions in business directories. So, at this point, I just need to know if you'd like me to undelete the previous article to your userspace so that you can work on it or not. I wish you the best, and again thank you for your commitment to social justice. - Philippe | Talk 22:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC) Ah, great insight. Thank you. And thanks for the encouraging words. Yes, I believe we can pass that criteria. A few examples: ~ Green Options interview: [7] ~ UtneCast podcast - The Future of Fair Trade: [8] ~ LA Daily News article - An Inhuman Price: [http://www.fairtradesports.com/wp-content/images/pdfs/TomHoffarthArticle.pdf ] ~ Plenty Magazine - Bend It Like Oxfam [9] ~ Outside Magazine - Walk the Walk: More Green Living Tips [10] ~ Sierra Club [11] ~ Coop America interview [12] ~ Grist - Have a (Sustainable) Ball: [13] Please undelete the content at your convenience and place where you think is most appropriate. I can then add these media references with your approval. --ScottJames 00:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC) I've moved it to User:ScottJames/Fair Trade Sports for you. Good luck and let me know when you're ready to move it back out! - Philippe | Talk 00:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC) OK, I've updated it with the secondary source references. Is it fit to go live? --ScottJames 04:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Well, we're off to a good start - it reads like an advertisement though. What you'll need to do is to use those secondary sources to write something about the company - what ARE the sources saying? Tell us about the company in a way that's encyclopedic, not advertising. If it goes live like it is now, I guarantee it'll get killed as an advertisement. It needs to be written from a neutral point of view, and as a critical, balanced article. You might check out what has been written about other companies and use that as a starting point. - Philippe | Talk 04:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the guidance on this, Philippe. Using Newman's Own as my guide (since we use it as our business model guide, too), I've made another draft. I know you are quite busy. When you have a chance this week, your constructive criticism would be appreciated. --ScottJames 05:53, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Speedy Deletion? Phillipe, I am inquiring as to why my second entry for JJBuckley.com was deemed unacceptable? Can you please specify what the submission lacked/contained? Their latest move to become the first carbon-neutral distributor/retailer is indeed remarkable, enough so that the effort has been covered by Food & Wine, The Seattle Times, Wine Spectator, and a number of eco-focused publications. Any help you can provide so that I may re-shape it to fit the guidelines would be more than appreciated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bellman123 (talk • contribs). You know, I'm embarrassed to say that I'm not sure WHAT I was thinking when I deleted that one. It's a little weak on references (we normally encourage multiple references, see above) but that in and of itself isn't enough to get it speedy deleted. I've restored it, with my apologies. It's probably not safe from AFD yet - get some more cites in it - but it really shouldn't have been speedied. Again, my apologies. - Philippe | Talk 00:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia:Requests for page protection ... just wanted to say that you're doing a super job over there :) Good work! - Alison ☺ 01:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks, Alison! I appreciate the kind words. - Philippe | Talk 01:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC) User talk:Biggspowd I had never heard of that guy until tonight, when he modified an article I was watching. I soon saw a pattern of him trying to downplay or diminish anything that had to do with death or illness from smoking. I don't know if that's been a recurring theme, or just something he latched onto for vandalism or rabble-rousing purposes... but thank you for doing it. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC) No probl... I did reduce the length of his block, but it's still a substantial one, and he's appealing it. I stand by it though, he's got a block history that's pretty long. He called tonight a minor error or some such... <grin> - Philippe | Talk 02:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC) The devil made him do it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:06, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Yeah, he's pretty upset right now. <grin> - Philippe | Talk 03:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC) The user, or the devil? Or both? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Could go either way, but I meant the user. - Philippe | Talk 03:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC) When someone engages in a continuous loop of vandalizing and getting blocked, it makes you wonder. I've been blocked twice in my 2 1/2 years here. Both times it was deserved, and I sat it out quietly. One thing I know for sure: no one vandalizes like that "by mistake". Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Maybe he'll see the error of his ways and recant... I doubt it though. The next one will be indef. Some vandals grow up, others lose interest, and others get indef'd. I'm taking bets on this one. - Philippe | Talk 03:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC) I haven't bothered to look back at his history, but I'm guessing this smoking issue is just something he latched onto for the purpose of causing trouble. That's typical troll behavior. It doesn't matter what the issue is, it's the "game" that matters to those users. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC) You might want to reconsider that block shortening. He's just attempted to vandalize his own talk page (seems like blocked users can't create working redirects?) and left an uncivil edit summary with a personal attack [14]. The Parsnip! 03:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Yeah, I saw that. I'm gonna leave it as is, though. He's allowed to be mad at me, I blocked him. His SPELLING (of "yourselfs" [sic]) is what's really offensive though! I'm just gonna keep an eye on him once the block expires and if he crosses the line I'll make it indef. - Philippe | Talk 03:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC) If they blocked all the bad spellers, it would lighten traffic considerably. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC) The Spirit Philippe, I understand that I violated the 3RR. However, why did you not block Eric? I'm sure you don't have the time to wander through the history of these things, but will have seen that I added accurate and pertinent information and he unilaterally reverted. I'm sure it's the same old story but if the 3RR is applicable to my addition, it must certainly be applicable to Eric's reversions. Eric's edits did not fall under the Exceptions in Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. It appears to me that Eric has taken an Wikipedia:Ownership of articles posture that isn't helpful. Particularly, in view of the fact that my addition of Executive Producers is exactly what the example in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines provides for. If this persists, I will ask for mediation since Eric's position seems a little arbitrary and capricious. Dawgknot 13:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC) 71.172.225.72 (Take Two) I was looking at my watchlist, and I saw this: Kingda Ka‎; 16:51 . . (-778) . . User:Coaster1983 (Talk | contribs) (Removed Kingda Ka's shoulder restraints vs. Top Thrill Dragster's lap-bar restraints section as it does not have a non-Wikipedia source). Looking through the article, I saw that once again, 71.172.225.72 is making un-called for edits to these articles, and I feel it needs to be stopped. --Mooshykris 22:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Brock Lesnar The Lesnar article was screwed up. Looks like you copied directly from the talk page as opposed to copying the source code. Mshake3 03:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC) Bah, you're correct, of course. I've fixed it now, I think. - Philippe | Talk 03:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC) Random Smile! WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. -WarthogDemon 03:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC) Hey, thanks!! :-) - Philippe | Talk 04:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 34 20 August 2007 About the Signpost Bad Jokes, Deletion Nonsense, and an arbitration case WikiScanner tool creates "minor public relations disasters" for scores of organizations WikiWorld comic: "Tomcat and Bobcat" News and notes: Wikimania '08, 200 x 100, milestones Wikipedia in the news Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC) Troublesome user Hi, you recently semiprotected Lorna Fitzgerald per my request. However an account user has began to reinclude the information not only to this article, but also to the actor's character, Abi Branning. I had originally thought that it was only an anonymous ip, but user Ln of x seems to have acquired an account merely to reinclude this POV statement. He/she has ignored requests to stop. I dont want to get into an edit war, can you suggest what I can do from here? Regards Gungadin♦ 19:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks for bringing it to my attention: I blocked the user for violating the 3 Revert Rule on Abi Branning. If there continue to be problems, let me know, or report it to WP:AIV. - Philippe | Talk 19:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks for your help with this :) Gungadin♦ 20:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC) Eh em... You deleted my Tejas Club page, saying it was blatant copyright infringement. I'm the web master for the official site - tell me what I need to fix to get it back up and running.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amb975 (talk • contribs) 20:13, August 22, 2007 (UTC). Thomas McPherson Brown I rewrote all sections that violated copyright. Now they are in my own wordsSuperperro 04:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC) Great, thanks for the rewrite! - Philippe | Talk 04:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC) User:The amazing Magic idiot I edit conflicted you with on blocking this guy but you got there first it seems. Don't you think he's had enough chances? I was going for an indefblock - seemed like a pretty obvious case for one. Can't see what will change in a week given that his last block seems to have had little impact. WjBscribe 04:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC) You know, I guess because I'm still fairly new I tend to be a little conservative with the blocks. He's had one before, and I hate to go straight from 31 hours to indef, but I won't object if you want to adjust the block. I appreciate you talking to me about it first though.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 04:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC) It may be worth noting that this user likely also edits as 69.159.194.244, who has an almost identical history. This user is basically twice as bad as you think ;). Mark Chovain 05:34, 23 August 2007 (UTC) Good enough for me. I made the previous block indef and 6 month blocked the IP. (I don't want to indef block an IP. Makes me nervous. Wouldn't be prudent. - Philippe | Talk 05:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC) Yep - Best not to block the anons for more than a short time. Even in this case (where it's obviously a static IP), you never know if/when the user changes ISP, and the next user to get the IP will clearly be put off if they're indef blocked. Mark Chovain 06:15, 23 August 2007 (UTC) PeopleSupport Thanks for the quick action in semi-protecting the article! Soulrefrain 06:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC) My pleasure. Happy wiki! - Philippe | Talk 22:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC) Semi-protection for List of Konoha Ninja So after the 26th, the month-long notice goes away and the padlock appears in the upper right of the page? BrokenSphereMsg me 20:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC) Actually, the protection notice is driven by a template in the page, {{pp-semi-vandalism|small=yes}} - I've changed it to that template, which just gives the padlock. If you want the protection notice to appear instead, change that template to {{sprotect}}. - Philippe | Talk 22:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC) I'm used to seeing the padlock as an indication that a page's protected status is at least indefinite. Thanks for responding to my posting on the RFPP so quickly, you've improved the quality of Wikilife for the regular patrollers of the page that much better. BrokenSphereMsg me 22:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks for your kind words. :-) - Philippe | Talk 23:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC) Plastic pipe fittings & valves Philippe please can you help me protect the above page from msjapan? There is lots to discuss about sockpuppets and other stuff but msjapan keeps deleting an article which does have merit and the references are genuine not as msjapan says.--Huwjarce 14:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC) Ancient Egypt and race Did you look to the talk page? I am trying to invite people to respect the old version of the article. Then to discuss changes. I have been involved in the editing war to try to arrive to a compromise. Sorry for all this trouble. Egypt and race is a sensitive matter. I hope that things will come back to normal. Thanks for the remarks.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 22:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC) Yes, I did look at the talk page. I have also protected the page. The edit war on that page is out of control. - Philippe | Talk 22:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC) Thank you! Thanks for your message about sprotecting Body nullification and offering to sprotect my user page as well. At this point, I think I will leave it be, the IP only edited it once and hopefully will disappear now. Perhaps I have now reached some sort of Wikipedia milestone by having my user page vandalized ;) Risker 04:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC) Why have I been blocked My account, User:Ln of x, has been blocked for 72 hrs for some bizarre reason. All the edits I made were perfectly valid yet my user account was (and still is) blocked. WTF ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.124.97 (talk) 14:52, August 25, 2007 (UTC) That account was blocked because you persisted in putting in unencyclopedia and unreferenced edits such as "Abi, much like the very talented actress Lorna Fitzgerald that plays her, is often described as adorable. She is incredibly cute and cuddly. You just want to put your arms around her and cuddle her. She is sparkly and innocent, kind and caring, confident and adorable." You were warned several times that that was inappropriate tone for the encyclopedia. I stand by the block. - Philippe | Talk 15:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC) I don't really understand why this sockpuppet thing is taken so seriously. I'm only signing in with this username now (I don't use this account for 'sockpuppetting') because it's the only way I can contact you. I actually made the edit to Lewis carol this morning and I assumed it would be ok to edit it as User 84.69.124.97 since it allowed me to edit the article. I didn't realise you can't edit as an anon user whilst your account is blocked. You seemed to take it well seriously, you've blocked my IP address for 6 months !! Don't you think that's a bit harsh ? I'm sorry if I offended you that much but 6 months is ridiculous. Please could you reduce it. (I'm thinkin' to 1 or 2 days). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blink182rulesrock (talk • contribs) 17:19, August 25, 2007 (UTC) What would make you think that it's okay to edit while you're blocked? You know you're blocked... you can't log in... so you go and put the same edits to another page as the ones that got you blocked? Evading a block is a big deal. On the block message that I left on your talk page is instructions for how to appeal a block. That's your only option. And by the way, if I find that you've made edits with this account, I'll block it too. - Philippe | Talk 17:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC) What a surprise it was for me to see that when you logged in with this account you left the same type of messages that got you blocked on the last two. I'm surprised! Shocked! Horrified! OK, now I'm a little over the top. I've blocked this sock of yours as well. - Philippe | Talk 17:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC) Help Hello. As i understood there was an article on Alexander Kostarev that you deleted. I belive thats importent to have an article about him on Wikipedia because in the Russian Prog scene his considered to be one of the most importent figures. I didnt see the article when it was here, and if you could, please leave a copy of the article on my talk page and i would see if it could be improved. M.V.E.i. 17:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC) Thank you. I'll try to find more links and expand the article. I case it workd out i will upload it here first. In case it won't, i will let you know anyway. M.V.E.i. 18:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC) Done User:M.V.E.i./prog You can see the new article here. As you can see, i wrote a real biography and added links. I also puted the article in the categories that fit here. If you have no problems with it, i will uload it after i hear your opinion. M.V.E.i. 20:19, 25 August 2007 (UTC) I'd ideally like to see a statement that supports notability: awards, top selling records, something like that... as it is, I can't guarantee that it'll get past an AfD, but it's a lot better than it was! I certainly wouldn't speedy it now. - Philippe | Talk 20:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC) Modern progressive rock isn't selling much, it's not mainstream, it's almost"underground" (try to tell me a name of a known Progressive rock band that started inthe 2000s and not in the 70s or 90s?). But he appeared in the InProg festival three times, which is the main progressive rock festival in Russia. Once you become a cult figure in the Russian prog scene, only then you'r invited there. If you would know Russian you could read here his name as one of the most importent figures of Russian progressive & art rock. M.V.E.i. 21:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC) This link will help you to understand his some about him. I didn't copy the compliments from hear so the objectivety wouldn't get hurt: http://www.raig.ru/kostarev.asp M.V.E.i. 21:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC) The problem here is WP:MUSIC - we need to establish his notability in a method that would be accepted by that guideline, so... you need to somehow prove that he meets one of the criteria on that page. - Philippe | Talk 21:39, 25 August 2007 (UTC) Ok lets see. I judge by the Criteria for composers and lyricists on the Others. By the first it fits "Has been listed as a major influence or teacher of a composer, songwriter or lyricist that meets the above criteria", because he was the ine who practically started the Zappa thing in the USSR. The whole Prog scene in Russia is influenced by him. He appears in the big festival as i said he is noted as one of the most importent prog & art scene in the second link i gave you. He also fits "Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a musician or ensemble that qualifies above, a notable theatre, or has been taken up by a musician or ensemble that qualifies above". again, in the Russian link i gave you it's written: позже сотрудничал с С. Курехиным, С. Летовым, оркестром театра «Ромэн». Which meanse he worked with a theatre Romen, a known one, and with Yegor Letov. In the "Others" he fits "Is cited in reliable sources as being influential in style, technique, repertory or teaching in a particular music genre". The Russian link i gave you and other links i gave their state about him being one of the most importent in Russian prog scene and that he was of those who started it back in the 70s. And he fits "Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture". I gave their links fro, different Prog sites, including Russian, who praise him. M.V.E.i. 21:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC) OK, if you're satisfied that the article meets those requirements (and clearly spells that out in the article) then move it out to mainspace and good luck! :-) - Philippe | Talk 21:58, 25 August 2007 (UTC) Thank you, i moved it. Nice working with you. M.V.E.i. 22:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC) Thats it, i think the work is done. I also did some Redirect things with words like Kostarev, Kostarev Group and CosMoBob. M.V.E.i. 22:15, 25 August 2007 (UTC) Great, I did a few minor spelling corrections. :-) - Philippe | Talk 00:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC) recent block good move buddy ;) Ryan4314 04:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC) I'm glad I could help. Keep up the good reports to AIV. - Philippe | Talk 04:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC) RE:Deleting warnings However, as an IP I'm pretty sure he doesn't know how to set up an archive and from his past warnings, I thought he was a disruptive one. --Hasek is the best 04:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Hmm, I never knew that. --Hasek is the best 04:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Water Lilies page move I noticed that, after correcting some vandalism, you moved the Water Lilies article to Water Lillie. Isn't Water Lilies the correct English title, or am I wrong? Zagalejo 04:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Never mind, it's been resolved. Thanks for catching the vandals. Zagalejo 06:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Yikes, I'm glad someone caught that. Bad enough to not be plural, but spelled wrong! I have got to get more sleep before fixing redirects. - Philippe | Talk 19:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Sorry to bother you again Hello. I created a new article about another band, Disen Gage. I would like to hear your opinion about it, if theres anything i could improve here. Thank you (you can answer here on your talk page i will re-visit it). M.V.E.i. 15:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC) I'll be thrilled to look at it, but can't right this very moment (this was a quick on and off trip) but be patient with me, and I'll look at it - probably later tonight. - Philippe | Talk 19:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC) No problem, not in a hurry. I will go to sleep now so take your time, i'll be here again tomorrow in the evening and i will see here what you write. Thanks. M.V.E.i. 19:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Request for deletion Would you mind deleting this redirect per WP:CSD#R2? I made a mistake when I was creating a draft for the article. Thanks, — Zerida 19:23, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Done.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 19:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Hencer rocks A block-conflict again. I've extended this account's block to indefinite. It's a sole purpose attack/trolling account and I see no basis for the accusations being made. Given the pages it edited it obviously isn't a newbie so I don't think biting is a concern. Given that I see no chance of there editing behaviour improving in the future, I think an indefblock is appropriate. Hope you don't mind too much... WjBscribe 03:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC) I have absolutely no objection and totally trust your judgment. No worries from me. - Philippe | Talk 03:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC) Ummm...about that offer to sprotect my user page... Well, now that both of our user pages have been vandalized by the same really bad prose (I've reverted yours too), it seems my anonymous IP "friend" has extended his desire to share his lack of literary talent with both of us now. I think I would like to take you up on your offer to sprotect my user page, when you have a chance. Thanks. Risker 02:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 35 27 August 2007 About the Signpost WikiWorld comic: "Helicopter parent" News and notes: Court case, BJAODN, milestones Wikipedia in the news Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC) Greater Grace World Outreach Philippe! You did a semi-protection request for the above article today, and the IP user has re-activated an old account and circumvented the edits. Any chance of a block? Cheers :D Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 09:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC) Hmmm, can you convince me that the user is not making good faith edits? Any good faith edit is by definition NOT vandalism. - Philippe | Talk 21:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC) ==Username: Nokian70== It seems i was blocked under the above user name beacuse it was a product name. I choose it because i use it for other forum. If possible would like to change it to westendboy. I would be grateful if you would help me. unblock temporary so i can apply for the changes.. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.84.130.130 (talk) 12:50, August 28, 2007 (UTC) The block of Nokian70 for being like a product name is just silly. You'd better block me for being the name of a character in the LOTR series. If you want more accounts to block on such grounds, let me know...I'll give you hundreds. Unblock Nokian70. --Durin 13:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC) It looks like ^demon already handled an unblock. I'll tell you, I don't think I was off base on this block, but evidently there are a few people who do. My feeling is that just as I'd block someone whose name was Lexus300E as a promotional username, I should do the same with Nokian70. In both cases, they promote not just a product but the company making the product. In any case, it's over, and ^demon has unblocked and told the user they don't need to change their username, and I'm certainly not going to get into a wheelwar over it and potentially alienate a good user. - Philippe | Talk 21:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC) Unflair block of User : ln of x It's unbelievable how user : ln of x has been blocked from editing, just for making true and useful contributions. It just goes to show how sad you are, philippe, if that is how you get your kicks. By the way, learn to spell your name. For a boy, note ; PHILIP, not the gay effeminate version philippe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Return of the ln (talk • contribs) It's a pity that you feel it's necessary to run other people down to feel good about yourself. By the way, that sock is blocked too, now. - Philippe | Talk 21:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC) Blocked by me. This isn't the first time we've had sockpuppets vandalising articles related to EastEnders. Take a look at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Danh90 and especially the talk page to see what we've had to put up with! Thanks for dealing with these vandals and sockpuppets. — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 22:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC) And thank you for your timely block! - Philippe | Talk 22:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC) Our earlier discussion So, any chance that it's worth bothering? Feel free to email me. THF 22:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC) Yep, I'm composing an email now. Things look good. - Philippe | Talk 05:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC) User talk:Globlefashion I hadn't seen this exact situation before, so I tagged it to see how another admin would handle it. You took care of it quickly and efficiently - well done!--Kubigula (talk) 04:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks, glad to help out! - Philippe | Talk 04:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC) AN/I section Thanks for closing that, I hope it's not out of process to do what i did, reporting back and such. I doubt it is, but I'd like to be sure. ThuranX 05:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC) No problem at all. Thanks so much! - Philippe | Talk 05:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Info box prompting discussion Hi Philippe, Thanks for your notice regarding the protection on the 0845 number and 0870 number. Unfortunately, anonymous users still keep reverting my changes, but I realise that it needs significantly more vandalism before it can be protected. The people making the changes never cite the reason for reverting my changes, but it seems to be because they don't like the idea of people being able to find the geographic "free" alternatives to their costly numbers. Is there any kind of info box I could put on those pages to prompt a debate or discussion by these people so we can decide whether or not the link can stay "officially"? Unfortunately, them being anonymous probably means they won't want to debate it, but it is worth a try. James —Preceding unsigned comment added by JGXenite (talk • contribs) 09:10, August 30, 2007 (UTC) I think I missed something You're an admin? Jeez, I missed that entirely while I was out of town... Congratulations, admittedly pretty belated. -FisherQueen (Talk) 11:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC) <grin> Thanks! Yeah, I've been an admin for a month and a half or so. Plenty of time to make half the wiki mad at me. (The other half WOULD be mad, they just haven't come across any of my work yet!) I'm enjoying the pretty new buttons though. - Philippe | Talk 19:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Unfair Blocks Why is it that any account that makes any edits to Abi Branning or Lorna Fitzgerald is automatically blocked ? It seems very strange. Why can't people edit these articles constructively just like any other article ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avarules (talk • contribs) 12:53, August 30, 2007 (UTC) I'm going to test this theory; I've just made an edit to Lorna Fitzgerald, and if I'm immediately blocked, then I'll know that the above editor's theory is correct. -FisherQueen (Talk) 13:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC) I can't see your edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avarules (talk • contribs) 13:12, August 30, 2007 (UTC) I can. I congratulate FQ on being brave enough to risk certain blocking to make an edit. Unfortunately, she proved your premise incorrect. - Philippe | Talk 19:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks Thanks for the quick revert on my user page! (Hopefully due to your block, hopefully he learned his leasson :) )--Hasek is the best 16:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Request unprotection of Prawn farm massacre Hi. You protected Prawn farm massacre on August 27, with protection set to expire on September 10. I would like to request early unprotection because, in the midst of about 20KB of discussion, there has been some progress. The dispute, which began with User:Iwazaki's addition of the NPOV tags, revolves around primarily three issues: The third sentence of the lead paragraph. I have proposed rewording that sentence per WP:NPOV (see the bottom of the section titled "What is the primary source here?"), another user involved in the dispute (User:Watchdogb) has supported the proposed change, and Iwazaki has not objected. The possibility that all sources rely on the UTHR. Iwazaki has stated that he strongly "strongly believe"s that all of the sources use information from the UTHR. Despite repeated inquiries, he has not suggested why he thinks that is the case and has offered no proof to support his contention. Moreover, it's not entirely clear why that's relevant. The UTHR is considered an "independent" and reliable source by mainstream sources such as the BBC and International Herald Tribune. If you would like more details on that discussion, please see the sections titled "UTHR" and "What is the primary source here?". The neutrality/reliability of the Trawick (2007) source. This issue has been debated at great length (in the section titled "Trawick, Margaret"), but Iwazaki has yet to provide a tangible reason to question the reliability of a professor at New Zealand's largest university, especially since her source is used to support a statement of allegation and not a statement of fact. Twenty-four hours ago, I expressed my intention to request unprotection in order to implement several changes arising from the discussion. User:Taprobanus has supported my motion and Iwazaki has not objected. So, I ask that you unprotect the page so that various changes can be made (including the addition of a link to the online version of one of the disputed sources). I do not feel that the extra 10-day delay will result in any progress beyond what's been already made. If you are not comfortable unprotecting at this point, please let me know and I will make a detailed {{editprotected}} request on the article's talk page. Thank you, Black Falcon (Talk) 18:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Congratulations on your hard work toward consensus. I have unprotected the page so that you can make the changes. Thanks to you and your partners in this discussion for a good model of how this should work. - Philippe | Talk 19:32, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Thank you. Black Falcon (Talk) 20:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Moon Moon's still linked to from the mainpage - I'm not sure protection is that great an idea. Kinda spoils that "encyclopedia anyone can edit" things. For an article with a link off the mainpage, the vandalism isn't that bad and User:Laffy1992 has been indefblocked. Up to you, but you might want to reconsider... WjBscribe 22:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Bah, I should have realized it was still linked from the main page. You're right, of course. I've released the protection. - Philippe | Talk 22:48, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Thanks Just a quick thanks for protecting Arabian horse. I worked my butt off to get that article to GA status and I appreciate you helping me keep silly idiots from trashing it. Montanabw(talk) 01:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC) Of course. Thank you for your hard work! - Philippe | Talk 01:16, 31 August 2007 (UTC) OK, things are just getting too weird for me. See the last discussion on the bottom of the page at Talk:Arabian horse. Seems that others now think that they should edit the article without a clue about what they are talking about. I'd appreciate it if you'd keep this article on your watchlist for a little while, just until this current kafuffel passes. I may need reinforcements who are more neutral than I am able to be on this topic. Montanabw(talk) 01:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC) <Censored> you, Phil Note my latest edits to Abi branning and lorna fitzgerald. Let's see if I'm blocked now, shall we ? That will prove if my theory is correct or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.77.36.92 (talk) 15:53, 31 August 2007 (UTC) Yes, but the difference is, you didn't get blocked for those edits. You got blocked for generally being a pest with multiple accounts. This game is getting tiresome.- Philippe | Talk 19:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC) User talk:124.180.239.39 No warning given to them on talk page. Don't you think it would be better to warn the editor beforehand? Regards, PeaceNT 04:07, 1 September 2007 (UTC) You're absolutely right, I'm not sure how I missed that. Going too fast, probably. I'll fix it. - Philippe | Talk 04:08, 1 September 2007 (UTC) user:Tluvz2spooge This username should probably be blocked indef. Spooge is slang for semen/ejaculate. I reported to UAA after you blocked 24h at AIV, but I forgot that the bot removes the report regardless of why it was blocked. Cheers! Flyguy649 talk contribs 04:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC) Radhabinod Pal The individual edit warring on the page has been blocked; discussion has continued on the talkpage. Protection might be withdrawn at this time; this page will see heavy traffic as a result of today's New York Times article, and it should be updated. Hornplease 22:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC) If nothing else, there are some shocking errors about his legal background and what not that need to be remedied with a complete rewrite. I'm listing it on the Noticeboard for India-related articles the moment it's unprotected. Hornplease 22:46, 1 September 2007 (UTC) An explanation of your rationale in protecting would be appreciated, actually. I am watching this page.Hornplease 06:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC) Naruto Uzumaki Since you have changed the protection of Naruto Uzumaki from semi to full, please change the protection template accordingly. It's confusing me and some users. --ren 17:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC) Is there a particular format that the article edit propossals should be in (other than the tag)?Anthonzi 04:59, 3 September 2007 (UTC) Nope, you'll be find as long as you use the editprotected template. Generally, if you have everything all set up so they can just copy/paste/go, it's easier. - Philippe | Talk 06:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC) Ghost You should really not misuse your admin privledges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.182.222.84 (talk) 02:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC) Oh how cute, a ghost. - Philippe | Talk 06:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC) Wikiproject Oklahoma Newsletter Greetings! This is a random delivery of the WikiProject Oklahoma newsletter, the "WikiOkie Reporter". You will not recieve this again unless you sign up. The WikiOkie Reporter WikiProject Oklahoma's Newsletter Issue 1 - September 2007 Discuss this newsletter Your second or third stop for WikiProject Oklahoma News Sign up to receive this newsletter Oklahoma Portal Current article statistics WikiProject Oklahoma releases new newsletter September 2007 brings a new face to WikiProject Oklahoma: a newsletter. As in all of Wikipedia, the new WikiOkie Reporter (tenative name) is intended to be a collaborative effort among editors. Anyone can edit it: this month's newsletter is placed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Oklahoma/newsletter/aug07, but next month's will be placed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Oklahoma/newsletter/oct07, with the following month at /newsletter/nov07, and so on. While this month's article's were initially written by User:Okiefromokla, it is hoped other editors will be excited to contribute to articles, content, layout, and ideas. This is a completely new child of WikiProject Oklahoma, and it should reflect the collaborative work of everyone who's bored and has nothing to do for a few minutes. As such, anything can be discussed here: anything - layout, color scheme, pictures, content, etc. The behind-the-scenes workings for the WikiOkie Reporter will be simple: anyone wishing to receive the newsletter in their talk page may place their name at sign-up list, but they are more than free to remove their name from the same list at any time. Anyone wishing to discuss ideas or anything at all related to the newsletter may look no further than here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Oklahoma/newsletter/talk. Several WikiProjects already have ongoing newsletters, including Wikipedia: WikiProject North Dakota, from which WikiProject Oklahoma's newsletter has been based. For the time being, Okiefromokla will assume distribution responsibilities for the newsletter, maintaining the template, and writing articles from scratch if other editors have not done so by the 1st of the month. Promotions on the rise For many Wikipedians, summer is a time to kick back, relax, and make an occasional minor edit to their favorite few pages. Not so in WikiProject Oklahoma. Between May 12 and September, editors have been busily working on Oklahoma, Tulsa, and Woody Guthrie, and all three have been promoted. Prior to May, there were only seven Featured or Good articles in WikiProject Oklahoma. On May 12, Tulsa was promoted from B-class to FA class after a few months of extensive editing. Its primary editors were User:Nmajdan, User:SandyGeorgia, User:Okiefromokla, and a handful of others. On August 25, Oklahoma was promoted from B-class to FA class after a month-long blitz. User:Okiefromokla, User: SandyGeorgia, and several anonymous IPs contributed heavily to the article. On June 13, 2007, Woody Guthrie was promoted from B-Class to GA class after two failed attempts at promotion. User:Dannygutters, User:Gaff, User:Maenpong, and a handful of others contributed most to the article. This month's task: Assess articles! Check out all these unassessed articles to help out! The WikiProject Oklahoma newsletter is a work in progress so please share your ideas about how the newsletter can be improved. If you no longer wish to receive this newsletter, please remove your name from the sign-up list. This newsletter was delivered to you by User:Okiefromokla Thanks Thanks... Thank you for showing your support for me in my recent RfA. Unfortunately, I was unable to earn the required consensus and did not succeed. I do hope to put in another request in a few months, once I have improved upon the concerns addressed by the rest of the participants. Your expressed trust in me will definitely help me reach that goal. Thank you again, and happy editing! Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC) LGBT WikiProject Newsletter Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC). Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 36 3 September 2007 About the Signpost From the editor: Interview with Jimbo Wales WikiScanner tool expands, poses public relations problems for Dutch royal family WikiWorld comic: "George P. Burdell" News and notes: Fundraiser, Wikimania 2008, milestones Wikipedia in the news Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 04:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC) And in the morning when I woke there was no Antonio Just some money that he’d left for the memory of me And oh my beautiful guitar, that’s what really broke my heart Had been stolen by the two-faced low lothario Charlotte Hatherley xx Charlotte Hatherley 05:40, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Uhm, fabulous. Thanks for sharing! - Philippe | Talk 05:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Trolling abi is adoreable and u speel ur name gayly! (Just so you don't feel left out!) — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 09:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC) lol - see, that's all I'm asking for. /me tosses the troll some fishies. - Philippe | Talk 14:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC) AnemoneProjectors is a queer. And yes, Lorna Fitzgerald is cute and cuddly; I want to cuddle her. BTW, I got a grade A* in GCSE English so don't mock my spelling. Philippe, you spell your name like a gayman. You are a gaylord. FisherQueen is a sad act who spends her life reverting peoples edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuddlylorna (talk • contribs) 18:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Awww, how precious. - Philippe | Talk 19:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Indeed. Also, this is the first time I've seen surrogate trolling! Leebo T/C 19:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC) I'm growing rather attached to this little guy. I'm gonna be all fr0wney-faces when he grows up and goes off to college, or tech school, or goes off to be a hax0r or something. - Philippe | Talk 20:17, 7 September 2007 (UTC) Yeah, Philippe. You're gay. So there. :P -FisherQueen (Talk) 01:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC) By the way- I am, in fact, sexually attracted to rabbits. -FisherQueen (Talk) 01:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC) That confirms what I've always suspected. You have a cartoon fetish. Which is okay with me, because He-Man was pretty hot. - Philippe | Talk 05:48, 8 September 2007 (UTC) User:Pearljr Hmm... the anon IP blanked the page, and which I reverted as vandalism. They then pointed me to this guideline, so I talked it over with ArielGold and she suggested I speedy it. I don't care either way, just wanted to let you know my rationale. — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 06:14, 8 September 2007 (UTC) No worries at all - I tend to be pretty broad about the use of user pages; it's a grey line b/w advertising and bios on there, as far as I'm concerned. Thanks watching for it, and for the speedy tag. - Philippe | Talk 22:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC) Jason Rees Yikes, sorry about the speedy delete on this article! I overlooked the reference. Maybe I should get to bed :) Postoak 06:21, 8 September 2007 (UTC) Eh, no worries. Happens to all of us. - Philippe | Talk 22:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC) Piperdown unblock request I sent you an answer via Wikipedia email - if you don't get it, email me directly (dgerard@gmail.com) and I'll answer that way - David Gerard 12:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC) Thanks, David - received and responded. I appreciate it. - Philippe | Talk 22:43, 8 September 2007 (UTC) Gfzh I've been dealing with this user for a while, and I'm reaching the conclusion that his own English isn't quite at the standard that he believes it to be. A number of his editing practices can be classed as disruptive. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 23:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC) Yeah, I was beginning to suspect that. I took a quick look at his contribs and saw some things that concern me. I'll keep an eye on him as well. Thanks! - Philippe | Talk 23:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC) Unprotection Please do not unprotect a high-use, high-risk template like Template:Film, even if you know and trust a user who is simply trying to update the code. {{editprotected}} was designed for this exact reason. I spend a good deal of time fulfilling editprotected requests; I know it seems easier to just unprotect the template and let someone else do some work. However, Template:Film is transcluded over 33,000 times, and when multiple edits are made, big or small, all of the pages that transclude it have to be re-cached. I apologize if I'm telling you something you already know, however, I believe it merits stating. In addition to the burden on the pages, unprotection, even if just short-term, also leaves a template highly vulnerable to vandalism. Thanks. --MZMcBride 00:25, 9 September 2007 (UTC) In this particular case, the user has used the editprotected template multiple times, and expressed frustration that they kept needing to request admins do minor changes. I saw a very limited potential for damage in unprotecting it for a short time and saving admins from multiple requests for editprotected. - Philippe | Talk 23:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC) UAA Regarding this, I guess not :-) --Boricuæddie 23:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC) Yep, I saw that. I disagree with the block, but not enough to kick a fuss about it. Thanks for all the hard work you're doing. It is appreciated. - Philippe | Talk 23:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC) Thanks, kind stranger :-) Regards, Boricuæddie 23:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC) Naruto dispute There are two problems that need to be addressed: 1) On the Naruto (character) page, it says that it's only been heavily implied that Minato Namikaze is Naruto's father, yet, he's listed as Naruto's father under "Relatives". As the article is locked, we need you to change it. 2) On http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Konoha_ninja, SomeGuy (yes, that's his nick) is waging the same editing war against me, DESPITE being a part of the discussion on Naruto's talk page and knowing fully well what happened there. Could you at least talk to him? He wrote that he's of the opinion that heavily implying is underscoring the fact and as such, their blood ties are a fact (which it isn't, which is why a Wikipedia article cannot state it). ~FallenAngelII 11:03, 10 September 2007 (GMT+1) Blocking Users If I am reverting vandalism and give someone the "final warning" do i need to post it here or do admins patrol users looking for final warnings? Ctjf83 02:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC) If the user continues to vandalize past the final warning, please do post it to WP:AIV, and admins will take a look at it. If they stop after the final warning, then your warning has done its job, and we can all skip merrily down the road.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 02:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Tra la la. -FisherQueen (Talk) 10:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC) I said nothing about singing while you skip... - Philippe | Talk 14:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC) LGBT wikiproject While I'm asking you stuff...I was looking at this and looked at Joe McDermott (politician) and saw the reference that he is indeed an LGBT person, so I deleted his name from the unsourced section is that the proper thing to do, delete them after they are sourced? Ctjf83 02:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC) I've never come across this before, but it makes perfect sense to me. I think you did it correctly. - Philippe | Talk 14:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Denticon I just copied and pasted what i wrote on the talk page of Denticon. On the second deletion did you even look at that article or did you just automatically delete it just because. I thought I would help wiki but there is no time for improvements to me made try to "Quarantine" an article, or see if it is being edited at the very moment you delete it. Gdbanks 04:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC) as i was trying to make the original article less like an advertisement it was deleted. i left the advet and the hangon tags because the article still needs revision. i am not the original creator of this article. i guess i need to save each little stip in my editing to prevent it from getting deleted as i try to improve it. thanks Gdbanks 04:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC) There are a couple of issues with that article: the first is that it's advertisement, but the second is that the company/software simply isn't notable, to my knowledge. I'll userfy the article though and move it to your userspace... I'll put it at User:Gdbanks/Denticon. Thanks but like I said, I am not the Creator of this article. If you could userfy it to the original creator that would be good. I was just trying to make the article better not become owner of it. as far as being notable I do not know ether. Thanks Gdbanks 04:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC) Barnstar The Working Man's Barnstar For all your hard work at RFPP. Should I just take it off my watchlist, since you seem to answer every request anyway? :) ~ Riana ⁂ 04:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC) LOL - thanks! But for God's sake, don't take it off your watchlist! Alison usually beats me to them. - Philippe | Talk 04:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC) Allie's on adminbreak now... it shows, I got to answer about 10 requests in a row the other day without edit-conflicting her :) ~ Riana ⁂ 04:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC) I wondered how it was that there were four in a row with no response. It all makes sense now.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 04:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC) Why did you delete Etisalat Egypt Page ok I don't know if you can help me with that or not, but the page Etisalat Egypt was removed, they say it was considered as an ad, I am not sure , but I think it was not. and I think that the tag was added by one of the compatitors of Etisalat. please I need to know how to retrieve that page again. 19 Part One: Boot Camp You recently removed the speedy deletion notice from 19 Part One: Boot Camp. The article wasn't up for speedy deletion in the first place. I was restoring a previously speedy deleted article, and was in the middle of taking the notice off myself, when you removed it. You were only seconds quicker. JIP | Talk 05:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC) Oops! Sorry 'bout that! Margaritas and admin stuff may not be the best mix!  :-) Pilot (Las Vegas (TV series)) declined?? All but the opening paragraph is taken directly from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0625457, and the opening paragraph is taken from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0625457/plotsummary. It is definitely a copyright infringement. -- ArglebargleIV 05:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC) You're quite right. That was absolutely a mistake. Thanks for following up on it with me. - Philippe | Talk 05:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Thanks -- and sorry for the short tone of my post above. -- ArglebargleIV 13:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Semi-protection for List of Konoha Ninja - again Moreschi full-protected the page due to edit warring which has expired, but didn't restore the semi-protection even though I asked about restoring it a few days ago. Is it possible for you to reactivate it or do I have to go through the RFPP again? Thanks. BrokenSphereMsg me 14:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC) I put a 2 week sprotect on it. Let's see if they lose interest now. If not, let me know. - Philippe | Talk 15:44, 14 September 2007 (UTC) Thanks again for your help. I doubt this will happen, but will keep an eye on it when it opens up again. BrokenSphereMsg me 15:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC) RFA Thanks Click there to open your card! → → → Dearest Philippe, Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 96 supports, 1 oppose, and 3 neutrals. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. I'm a new admin remember, so if you have any suggestions feel free to inform me of them. I would like to give a special shout out to Hirohisat, Wizardman, and Husond, for there original co-nominations. Thank you once again and good day. Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor Credits This RFA thanks was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunatly this is not entirely my own design. Dear Philippe Smiling is contagious, you catch it like the flu, When someone smiled at me today, I started smiling too. I passed around the corner and someone saw my grin When he smiled I realized I'd passed it on to him. I thought about that smile then I realized its worth, A single smile, and just like mine could travel round the earth. So, if you feel a smile begin, don't leave it undetected - Let's start an epidemic quick, and get the world infected! Love you lots, my dear Philippe! :) Phaedriel 23:37, 15 September 2007 (UTC) Isn't that kind? I appreciate your wonderful thoughts, Phaedriel. I'm proud to call you "friend". - Philippe | Talk 23:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC) the user I blocked Thanks for your message. I have to leave the computer for a bit, so I appreciate it if you would do the unblocking and keep an eye on them for a while. I have no problem with giving them a second chance. By the way, it's always good to work with you on vandal fighting and AIV patrol. Academic Challenger 00:21, 16 September 2007 (UTC) THank you for your kind words. I'll do it and keep an eye on him. - Philippe | Talk 00:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC Pat Lang article & Leevoy Thanks for the notice to User:Leevoy.Godspeed John Glenn! Will 11:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC) WP:NAS Hey Philippe, many thanks for the words of encouragement about NAS - it means a lot. Ryan Postlethwaite 16:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC) Unblock request reviewed Howdy, I've reviewed an unblock request at User talk:Wiimo. Navou banter 03:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC) I was reverting Vandalism If you see i was reverting a Vandal on the site, told him to bring it to talk as well as warned him 3 times. the vandalized edit is still up on the article and must be reverted! thank you for locking the pageUkrNole 485 23:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC) Please Revert Screamingtrees has vandalized our site continuously, please revert his edit and observe that i am not the one at fault just protecting the page as all other venues of resolving went without success, i ask for reinstatement of my editing privileges. UkrNole 485 23:54, 17 September 2007 (UTC) To my knowledge, your editing privileges are not withdrawn - I certainly haven't blocked you. I have protected that page so that no one other than admins can edit it for two weeks. Use the time to figure out a compromise. By the way, for your information: edits made in good faith can never be considered vandalism. Unless you can prove malice, or bad faith, you are radically in violation of our assume good faith policy. The same goes for the other user, by the way. I hate edit wars. Please find another way to resolve this - the page protection is intended to force you folks to go to discussion about it.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 01:03, 18 September 2007 (UTC) User:Mylordjesus Hi, Philippe. I had earlier recommended that this name be taken off of WP:UAA and sent to WP:RFCN. Shortly after that happened, you blocked the name. I was hoping to get your input on why it is a username violation, because I did not feel it should be blocked. It refers to a religious figure, but in an expression of faith, rather than a distasteful way, as described by the policy. Thanks for your input. Leebo T/C 01:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Hi Leebo, and thanks for asking. I didn't see that you had sent it to RFCN, or I certainly wouldn't have issued a block. I got that one in an email from someone. As for why: I thought about this one long and hard, particularly as regarding any expression of faith: if it had been "JesusIsMyLord", then I'd have probably have been okay with it - but I believe that seeing posts signed as "MyLordJesus" would be potentially disruptive. I'm willing to have you review the block and lift it, I don't feel that strongly about it. Thanks again for asking my thinking. - Philippe | Talk 01:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Thank you for the prompt reply. I respect your judgment and am not seeking to lift the block. I was away from the computer and was not present when the block took place, so I wanted to discuss it. I'm satisfied with that. Thanks again. Leebo T/C 01:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC) You're quite welcome. I appreciate your collegiality. - Philippe | Talk 01:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Worry not :) Don't worry, dear Philippe - scroll up my talk page, and see Maxim's message, and his talk page. Just a typical case of two admins stepping on each others' toes, that's all ;) Love lots, Phaedriel - 01:34, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Perfect! I'm glad it worked out. - Philippe | Talk 01:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Those pesky usernames Dear Philippe, for the second time I requested blocking the IP of the person creating admin-bashing usernames[15], but alas I see from the block log that they're back. Is it worth it to file another RFCU to block the IP again? If so I will gladly start another request. ~Eliz81(C) 06:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC) I think you'd be fine to just keeping adding them to the same RFCU, and to report the name to WP:UAA. Thanks, those are some pretty ugly ones, aren't they? - Philippe | Talk 15:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Mitch McConahay‎ Hi, Just wanted to inform you that the article Mitch McConahay‎ that you speedily deleted, has been recreated by the author -- ¿Amar៛Talk to me/My edits 16:41, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Got it. It turns out I'm not dead! ... in case anyone was wondering where I've been.  :) -- Merope 17:41, 18 September 2007 (UTC) You know, I was thinking about leaving you a message yesterday, and got offline before I did it. Where the hell have you been? Thanks for takin' care of that speedy for me. - Philippe | Talk 19:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Dangit, I thought she'd died, and I was finally Bitch Queen of All Wikipedia. Now I have to settle for being Bitch Princess again. -FisherQueen (Talk) 19:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Ah, but you're the real queen.  :) Real life stuff just caught up with me, I guess. I moved in with my boyfriend (so I no longer leave myself logged in at home) and work just got crazy busy for a while. But life is good and I'm now squishing vandals and it feels okay. I just wish I'd stop getting error messages. Work, Wikipedia, work! -- Merope 19:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC) True Love can really interfere with your Wikicareer. Or so I've heard. I wouldn't know personally. Dammit. -FisherQueen (Talk) 19:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Wait ... if anyone's a QUEEN here... dammit, I lost my tiara. - Philippe | Talk 22:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC) List of portable software protection Hi, on List of portable software the requested protection had been semi, but it appears fully protected? Was that deliberate...? Just curious as I still wish to work on it, and had only asked for the semi for the IP vandals. Thanks! • Lawrence Cohen 21:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC) What you're experiencing is... uhm... software problem? Oh wait! Server problem! Is there any way I can blame it on anything other than the effect of red-bull and vodka on a tired sysop? I'm afraid I'm going to have to accept responsibility for a mistake there. I've fixed it. :-) Thanks for letting me know, sorry about the inconvenience. - Philippe | Talk 22:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Heh, no inconvenience really! Thanks for the semi. It possibly isn't even needed, but as it's the half of the main bone of apparent contention at the AfD... well, it seemed like a good idea? Thanks for helping! • Lawrence Cohen 22:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Please Help I have recently added information to Dicentra formosa I'm not exactly entirely sure how to add the references. If you could do it for me and/or show me how to, that would be greatly appreciated. The references are listed in said article's talk page. Thank you Riffsofcobain 03:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC) Hi there - the instructions for adding a reference are at Wikipedia:Citing sources - I'll be happy to do it for you, but can't get to it tonight. I'll take care of it in the morning, if you haven't by then. :-) - Philippe | Talk 03:07, 19 September 2007 (UTC) Thanks! Thanks for takin' care of that guy who was vandalizing Future Trunks. I always feel like I'm doing something wrong when I have to revert a lot, justified or not. x.x Lychosis T/C 22:19, 19 September 2007 (UTC) No worries, I'm happy to help. That's what they keep us around for. ;-) - Philippe | Talk 22:19, 19 September 2007 (UTC) IP Block Would it be possible to block User:71.33.162.242 from editing Roller Coaster articles? It's become tedious to undo all of the annoying (and many bordering vandalism) edits he/she makes. At the least, would it be possible to protect all of the Six Flags Great Adventure roller coaster articles? Thanks in Advance, --Mooshykris 20:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC) After a review of the user's contributions, I believe they're acting in good faith - as such, they don't meet the definition of vandalism. I'm sorry, but I'm not able to issue a block or protect the page under those circumstances. If you have evidence of bad faith, I can certainly look at it. - Philippe | Talk 21:50, 20 September 2007 (UTC) ++ Chris Bosh == The Chris Bosh article that was deleted wasn't a copy, and I had sources. Mr. Papaya 04:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Automated Tools Can Be a Curse :P Sorry about this. I was trying the twinkle protection feature but obviously I had bugged up one part of the process and accidentally full protected the article. I automated tools are helpful but as you see getting too used to them can be a curse...that's the last time I protect anything with Twinkle. The old school way works just fine.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 22:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC) No worries, no harm done. I use Twinkle for a lot, but I've had problems with the protection feature too. I still do protection the Old Skool way. :-) - Philippe | Talk 04:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Andrew Baron / Rocketboom Thanks for the protection on these pages. I previously posted a RFC for each article but I'm not sure I did it correctly. The process recently changed and I don't see the bot picking up the changes. Can you check the bottom of Talk:Rocketboom and Talk:Andrew Baron when you have a moment? Cleanr 06:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Talk:Damon lomax Maybe you didn't notice, but Talk:Damon lomax is a talk page for an article which no longer exists. Could you reconsider your speedy decline on this one? -- Dethme0w 15:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC) You're absolutely right. I'm not sure what I was thinking... probably thought it was a User talk instead of an article talk. Sorry about that. Looks like nawlins got it though. - Philippe | Talk 22:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Deleting re-created stuff Man, check up on whether something has become "notable" or not before jumping in a deleting something, thinking it makes you a hero to the Wiki-dictators. Brophy's become noteable, whether you like it or not. His jersey was retired and was given awards... which makes him noteable, even by Wikipedia's narrow-minded definition. Fix what you ruined. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradn87 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 22 September 2007 (UTC) OK, first things first... I place a very high premium on civility, and your talk of wiki-dictators and fixing what is ruined is certainly not welcome. Wanna try again, being pleasant this time? Second - I'm going to need to know what article you're talking about. Given that I delete a couple hundred a day some days, it'll be helpful if you'll narrow it down for me. At that point, I'm certainly happy to discuss my decision process with you. In general, if you're trying to recreate something that's been deleted previously, though, the best way is WP:DRV, and make your arguments there. - Philippe | Talk 22:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Eh, I found the article you're referring to, and stand by my deletion. There was an AFD on this about two weeks ago. That should go to DRV if you believe there's reason to override the valid AFD. - Philippe | Talk 22:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC) TfD nomination of Template:Yung D. Template:Yung D. has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Mbisanz 19:41, 22 September 2007 (UTC) Shep of Fort Benton, Montana Can you please undelete the Shep of Fort Benton, Montana article (in my user space if you wish)? Although I was not the original author, there was meaningful content in there, enough to justify a stub tag. There are plenty of hits on Google supporting notability and I will try to add more content. Thank you. --NeilN 03:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC) Done, it's at User:NeilN/Shep. - Philippe | Talk 03:14, 23 September 2007 (UTC) Nehrams2020 RfA Thanks Thank you for your participation in my RfA, which closed successfully with unanimous support. I appreciate you taking the time to stop by and vote and I can't wait to learn the new tools and further immerse myself into Wikipedia! Please don't hesitate to point out any errors I make so I can prevent them from occurring again. I'm always here to help, so if you ever need anything, just let me know. Also, thanks to Wizardman for nominating me and for guiding many other editors to become admins. Again, thank you and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 06:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC) Fabrictramp RFA Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship, which passed with 50 supports, 1 neutral, and 1 oppose. My goal is to keep earning your trust every time I grab the "mop". (And I'm always open to constructive criticism and advice!) Again, thanks. --Fabrictramp 16:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC) 70th St Thank you for the clarification on the 70th St wiki page. Ive take note on the validity of the case. Appreciate your fast advise. :) --Killerserv(talk) 04:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Tagged Crg west again for CSD I tagged Crg west again but this time for G12. They copy and pasted parts of their website. I just realized this after looking at the history. Spryde 18:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Well, it looks like it got deleted G11, which I don't think it was... but a G12 would have worked nicely. Good call. Thanks for letting me know. :) - Philippe | Talk 21:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Volume 3, Issue 39 24 September 2007 About the Signpost From the editor: Survey results Wikimedia announces plans to move office to San Francisco WikiWorld comic: "Ambigram" News and notes: Times archives, conferences, milestones Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Bemanistyle Deletion Hi Philippe, just had a question regarding the deletion log for the article Bemanistyle. I'm not here to contest the deletion, however since the history of the article is gone for normal users, I'm curious about the reason for the original deletion (since there were three deletions done within the period of a day, and I can only find the nomination/rationale for one--the very final one, I believe). If you don't mind letting me know, I'd appreciate it. There's some related Drama going on with AfD for some other fringe-related articles, so I'm not sure if it's just someone trying to make a POINT or not. Specifically, a user is going around nominating other articles for deletion just because his own article was deleted. Granted, that doesn't mean that the article I'm inquiring about should be revived, but it might be something that should be addressed separately. If you want the related AfD, please see StepMania and DDR Freak. Thanks in advance, dougk (Talk ˑ Contribs) 05:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Sure, Doug: I did the initial speedy delete on it, and it looks like a couple other folks agreed with me. Basically, when I got it, the article didn't give any assertion of notability for the website: it looks like every other one of the thousands of forum websites on the internet. There were no references, and the only links were self-referential. Based on that, I believe that the article failed Criteria A7-web. - Philippe | Talk 14:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Thanks for your reply. I've got no reason to argue with you there, despite however much I may like the website (and my own involvement with said site). Honestly, it'd be nice if it were more than just a forum, but I don't think I could prove otherwise (nor do I have any reason to expend a ton of energy doing so). Changing reality takes too much effort, I think. :P In any case, thanks once again, and take care! dougk (Talk ˑ Contribs) 17:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC) No problem at all. Have a great day. - Philippe | Talk 18:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Unprotect Bobby Bowden Page? Hi! The Bowden page has been editprotected for a week or more now. There's been discussion on the talk page leading to a kind of consensus, which we're ready to implement. Also, the analogous quarrel on the Joe Paterno page has completely died down by now, so I'm thinking the Bowden page will be more stable as well. So as the admin who protected it in the first place, would you be willing to let it loose? Thanks, Joel Jbening 22:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Done, and congratulations to you on coming to consensus there. Looks like you folks are off to a really solid start, and a good example of how dispute resolution is supposed to work! I hope you'll have no further problems, but if you do, please let me know and we'll see if we can keep it from getting out of hand. - Philippe | Talk 22:43, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Grant Langston (Motorcyclist) deletion See also: Grant Langston and Grant Langston (Musician) hi mate (i presume you are the first port of call by a quick reading of Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted? - forgive me if not), I’m sure your just working through some great backlog somewhere, and that normally you WP:AGF, but as you can see from this note on my talk page, a newbie (and somewhat troublesome editor it appears) had in good faith, requested i help split a page. thus i did all the moving, etc and create the new page. having seen in my time some quick AFD, PROD, etc i tired to do all the "right" things, and put a large note to that effect on the talk page, even when the first Speedy deletion notice. maybe in the backlog you overlooked it (i presume you deleted it from the deletion log - I’m no expert in this field) or I inavertedly didn't fulfil some crucial requirement. Thus can you (or please point me in the right direction) restore the deleted page, so i, Otis66Driftwood/FOUR TILDES, or other editors can carry on improving that article. Thanks in advance and my apologies if its not your fault! Hi there - you're correct that I was working through a backlog of speedy delete candidates. In order to let you work on the article for a while and keep it safe from being deleted while you do, I've restored it for you at User:Pickle UK/Langston. You'll need to add some verification of notability, as I'm sure you know, using some reliable sources but once you've got that done, I'd be happy to take a quick look and make sure it's safe from Speedy Deletion and then move it back into the 'pedia for you. Just let me know when you think it's ready to go. Good luck! - Philippe | Talk 22:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Cheers there mate, my forte in normally all thing transport, UK stuff and general improving of existing articles rather than creating new ones (esp WP:BIO ones) ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pickle UK (talk • contribs) 23:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC) Anti-gravity Michael Busch has requested a straw poll of Anti-gravity. You may want to add your comments. Tcisco 01:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC) Thank you for the invitation, however, I'm not really qualified to judge whether or not undue weight has been placed. - Philippe | Talk 05:13, 28 September 2007 (UTC) tyvm Yeah, I noticed an ip a few times during rcpatrol, so I stalked his contributions page until he vandalized after the final warning. Alas, since I do not have admin powers, I must submit for help to others. And you were the one. Just a thanks for doing this work. Xiong Chiamiov :: contact :: 05:07, 28 September 2007 (UTC) No problem at all, I'm pleased to help when I'm around. Thanks for watching out! - Philippe | Talk 05:13, 28 September 2007 (UTC) Please block user 72.221.100.24 User Smuschiano215 was indefinitely blocked by user Fuhghettaboutit for reversion warring over Environmental engineering law and for a vandalism spree of other articles. Smuschiano215 re-appeared as 72.221.100.24 and again started reversion warring over Environmental engineering law. User Scientizzle then blocked 72.221.100.24 for 48 hours. After the 48 hours, 72.221.100.24 has again reverted Environmental engineering law and Scientizzle is on a Wiki break. Would you please indefinitely block 72.221.100.24? Thanks, - mbeychok 15:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC) I've taken a slightly different approach to it: rather than chasing around IP addresses, which can easily be reset, I've chosen to semi-protect the article, so that IPs and new users can't edit it. That way the article stays safe, or the vandal is forced to create a username and wait for the account to age sufficiently to get past the semi-protection. I prefer to flush 'em out in the open, rather than handing out IP blocks, which can have significant collateral damage (particularly on dynamic IPs - we end up blocking legitimate users as well as the vandal). If the vandalism continues from registered accounts, let me know and I'll start isolating them and issuing blocks. For future reference, you usually can get a faster response to something like this by posting it to WP:ANI, in case I'm not online. You're always welcome to let me know here as well. - Philippe | Talk 15:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC) Thanks for your help and I see the logic of what you have done. Regards, - mbeychok 16:39, 28 September 2007 (UTC) My pleasure, and I'm happy to help. I'll watchlist the page as well. - Philippe | Talk 16:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC) 72.221.100.24 is at it again. A short while ago, he blanked out about half of my user page ... which was subsequently reverted by DerHexer before I even saw the blanking out. For someone who has a law degree, 72.221.100.24 is acting like a child. I repeat my request that you block him indefinitely. Please help, - mbeychok 21:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC) We never - never - indef block an IP address. There are significant collateral damage issues, particularly with dynamic IPs. I will, however, hit him with a good long block, right now. - Philippe | Talk 01:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC) Hard block of User:Youassassin I don't understand your reasoning for hard-blocking User:Youassassin. First of all, I don't see how the username violates the username policy at all, and it's certainly not so blatant that it requires an indefinite block without even a warning. You called it a "vandal-only account", presumably to justify the hard-block, but in its contributions I see one edit to a sandbox and one edit that he self-reverted. This indicates to me that you may have just blocked a good-faith newbie with an honest desire to learn about Wikipedia. Did you have any other reason that you didn't mention in the block summary? Blocking is not something to be done lightly. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 19:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC) The term "You Assassin" is fairly definitive, I think - it conveys a concept of violence, which certainly is a violation of the username policy. In addition to that, he added his name to an article (true, he self-reverted) and started an article about himself which was speedied. All of those together tended to push me towards "vandal". He didn't have a single contribution that wasn't an attempt at putting his name in the wiki somewhere. I'm willing to allow him to start a new account, if you think I'm violently off base, but I think the pattern is pretty clear. - Philippe | Talk 21:50, 28 September 2007 (UTC) The name "Youassassin" doesn't imply an intent to disrupt Wikipedia, doesn't "make harmonious editing impossible", and doesn't even come close to matching the other reasons on WP:IU, so I think you've just made a completely unjustified block. Users who experiment with Wikipedia, meanwhile, are always given second chances and multiple warnings before they are blocked, whereas you never gave Youassassin even one warning. In short, I think you take indefinite blocks far too lightly -- you shouldn't think of newbies as expendable. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 06:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Semi-protection for List of Konoha Ninja - 2 weeks are up And they're back and making not so constructive edits.  :( Is it possible to make the semi indefinite for now? BrokenSphereMsg me 00:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC) I hate doing indefinite semi-protect on articles, but I gave you another month. :-) If it's still a problem, I'll consider semi. - Philippe | Talk 01:12, 29 September 2007 (UTC) You did it originally when I put it up on RFPP.  ;) Still, this is very helpful. I'll let you know in a month what's the deal. BrokenSphereMsg me 01:27, 29 September 2007 (UTC) King Orgasmus One Hello. Can you please tell in what part there is any asserts of notability. Please reply here. Thank you.--Tasc0 03:25, 29 September 2007 (UTC) You know, I have NO idea what the hell I was thinking. Thanks for calling it to my attention, I've speedied it. - Philippe | Talk 04:05, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Glad to help.--Tasc0 18:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Related Hello, Above The Law (band) is a double redirect: Above The Law (band) Above the Law (band) Above the Law (group) There's no need to keep this redirect when it can be used the one "Above the Law (band)".--Tasc0 23:54, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Talk:Race and ancient Egypt Please see the Talk:Race and ancient Egypt page. I'm trying to get the article improved while it's protected. I want to get all disputes solved while it's still protected so that they can be implemented once it's unprotected. The article is clearly in bad shape and needs a lot of work, however I noticed that you have participated in editing the article previously and thought you might want to involve yourself in the discussions. Thanks. Wikidudeman (talk) 23:19, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Thank you for the invitation to participate. However, because I previously protected the page, and might do so again at some point, I'm choosing to recuse myself from this discussion. In addition, I have no particular expertise in this area. I'd be happy to be involved as an informal mediator, but I will not be drawn into this controversy. Thank you again for the invitation. I'm pleased to see notifications going out about discussion. - Philippe | Talk 23:25, 29 September 2007 (UTC) You can help with mediating then. Any help is appreciated. Wikidudeman (talk) 23:30, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Re A: Sorry / B: That’s The Trouble In declining my speedy tag on this article, you commented (in the edit summary) that Grace Jones is notable. I agree; but I tagged the article as db-nocontext, not db-bio. The creator of this article created a number of similar articles with titles that just won't fly in addition to this one, all of which have been speedily deleted. He's now attempting to add the same information into the main Grace Jones article in a completely irregular fashion. Frankly, I don't care enough about Grace Jones to deal with all this; I was just doing a bit of desultory RC monitoring and noticed that the guy was cluelessly creating articles with titles that would never be searched for and that would better be combined in a new article on Jones's singles. I'd appreciate it if you'd review your decision to not delete this. Deor 23:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC) Hi Deor, and thanks for your comments (and your RC monitoring!). I'll take a look at this one, and the creators' other articles and see if I can't work with him a bit to make him see the error of his ways. Then, perhaps we can take the opportunity to turn a potential author with some issues into one who understands the process. I should have seen that and done it automatically - thanks for bringing it to my attention. - Philippe | Talk 00:06, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Criticism This just goes to show everyone that you're a piece of shit admin, who I wouldn't trust with a potato gun. In fact, I not only question your intelligence but I also question your basic understanding of reality. Like I said here, there is no way you can stop me. However, I actually feel bad for the newbies that "actually" want to contribute constructively, given their environment. Anyways, with any luck Wikipedia will loose funding soon. Cheers! 70.247.252.110 04:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC) I'd like to thank you for your kind words, and wish you all the best. - Philippe | Talk 05:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC) I would trust you with a potato gun. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC) That's funny, I'm not sure that I would trust me with a potato gun. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. - Philippe | Talk 01:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC) By the way, when I called her a moron, I was speaking about this unfortunate edit. Road to a million usernames 75.28.169.232 02:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC) Re:75.47.139.169 I've actually dealt with this guy, and he's been trolling at Mouse (computing) and Mousepad since last year. See [16]. The page's been protected a number of times to prevent this dynamic IP from editing. Nishkid64 (talk) 05:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Hey, you're more familiar with the situation, that's fine, you'll get no argument from me. :-) - Philippe | Talk 05:26, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Australian rugby union captains I started it with the intention of adding the capatains, which I now have started to do, but it now seems to be a cock-up. Can you please help? Archifile 05:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC) I would be pleased to, however, I am just about to walk out the door. How about if I move the page out of the main encyclopedia and you work on it in your own userspace? Then, when it's ready, I'd be happy to move it back to the main encyclopedia if it meets our requirements? I'm going to move the page to User:Archifile/Rugby and you can work on editing it there. If you have particular questions, please feel free to leave them here for me and I'll get them when I get back home. - Philippe | Talk 05:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC) This issue certainly got somewhat confused :). It turns out the user was trying to create a category for the captains - I've posted some steps on my talk page on how to remedy this which will hopefully clear it up. Cheers, Blair - Speak to me 05:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Bay Area Linux Users Group No problem, still getting used to NPWatch here.--Rodhullandemu 10:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Article: Thomas Gleixner I just noticed your speedy deletion of my Thomas Gleixner article. I don't consider this person insignificant. He's one of the 70 Linux kernel developers invited by Linus Torvalds for the yearly Kernel Summit meeting. Many of these 70 programmers already have wikipedia articles. Alright, my article was a bit short. I have a lot more information about Thomas Gleixner. Actually, I just wanted to add some more when I noticed you deleted my article. I admit that it might have been better to write a longer article first and then publish it. Anyway, I ask you to undo your deletion or allow me to recreate the article. It'll definitely become longer, will contain a photo of Thomas, and will be linked with more other articles.--Hjkoch 13:00, 30 September 2007 (UTC) questions dear phillipe, i am JoeBonnano (not my real name), and i am new to wikipedia. i just posted some questions to roastytoast, who you may know of. stuff like, how do you create article, userpages, and find existing userpages on wikipedia (I always just type in the usename on google, but getting there directly from wiki would save me some time). also, i would like to know what the hell is an Admin, what does he do, and how can i be one, and do i want to be one at all? please, when you get a chance, get back to me on my talk page, cause i would really appreciate that. please try to get back to me on my talk paige. thanks, phillipe. P.S- are you mexican, cause phillipe sounds kind of latino, or maybe Italian, cause I'm Italian, and i think phillipe is both italian & Spanish. P.S.S- how do i make tables of contants for my pages and userpage, thats the biggest thing. ive used the tools to try to make articles with them, but it never works out well. P.P.S.S- I just saw where you said to post comments at the bottom of the paige, but i don't really want to re-write this whole thing, Sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeBonnano (talk • contribs) 03:28, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Hi Joe - on your user talk page, there's a great introduction to Wikipedia that includes things like "how to edit a page", etc. I'd start by reading those. Admins are normal users who have access to a few extra tools (the rights to block a user from editing, to delete pages, etc.) - I wouldn't worry about whether you need to be an admin for a while. The standards right now require that you have several thousand edits before you have a realistic chance of being an admin, and frankly, most users don't need those tools. We're kind of the "janitors" of Wikipedia - we clean up some messes, but don't have any extra say in content disputes or editing. I'll copy this message to your talk page as well. (PS - I'm French Canadian, living in the midwest). - Philippe | Talk 02:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC) what can be done about reverts? I know it was silly that admin itercession was needed on the cougar page and a block had to be put in place. Thanks for the help though. It mainly came about because one editor refused to discuss his constants reverts of multiple other editors who would come along independently to fix the page's style and align it with consensus WP:MOS. The editor finally discussed his edits, to no one elses satisfaction pretty much, and was outvoted 8-2. The result? He continues now to stubbornly edit war and revert, revert, revert. I came back and see that two other editors have tried to fix the page in the day since he's been outvoted and he's reverted them, I just made my own edit to do the same and probably will be reverted. What is done in edit war cases? I thought the vote would settle it. Thanks for any assistance! Beyazid 03:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC) That's so frustrating. I don't blame you for being irritated, I know I am also. If the user reverts more than 3 times in a 24 hour period, leave them a warning, and if they continue, report them to the appropriate noticeboard. If it comes down to it, I can semi-protect the page, which will block out anonymous users and prevent them from editing. It's a kind of harsh action to take, because it eliminates potentially positive contributions as well. You can also request help with dispute resolution, which may get the point across. If it comes to it, you can also open a request for comment about the user. Keep the faith - I know it's so frustrating. - Philippe | Talk 03:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC) Thanks! It is quite an experienced editor who knows well enough about 3RR and doesn't cross that line. Also a semi-protect isn't applicable. But the other options might be. Beyazid 05:09, 1 October 2007 (UTC) poor math skills I know it's probably difficult, but next time you do a 24 hour block make sure you use addition and subtraction to double check your work as you obviously don't seem very bright. Cheers! -- Road to a million usernames 75.28.169.232 02:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC) Some people never learn. Road to a million usernames 75.34.66.83 02:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC) Oh, you're quite right - I don't have enough fingers and toes to do that kind of math. I've altered your block message to reflect reality. - Philippe | Talk 02:53, 2 October 2007 (UTC) Asking Why did you delete my Jeff sutton article, i was not done it nor did you inform me of your deleation. Next time before you delete a artile that i made please at least have a deletion dicussion made or inform me. User: Icerainbow--Icerainbow 02:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC) I would be happy to restore the article for you, if you can provide me with three reliable sources that establish notability according to our guidelines. Once you've got them to me, I'll even add them to the article for you. All biographical articles are required to comply with the standards for biographies of living people and our notability rules. - Philippe | Talk 03:46, 30 September 2007 (UTC) Very well i will find 3 sources for you. I will put there here so you can see them. Please read them right away and give me a response if you think they are good.User:Icerainbow [17] [18] [19] [20] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Icerainbow (talk • contribs) 13:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC) I'll give you one of them - the imdb.com one. The other three, I'm sorry, don't meet our reliable sources requirements. Can you come up with critical reviews? Anything to establish notability? - Philippe | Talk 01:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC) Okay i will try. User: Icerainbow--Icerainbow 02:05, 1 October 2007 (UTC) Here are some new ones, tell me if they are enough [21] [22][23][24] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Icerainbow (talk • contribs) 19:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC) I'm going to refer you back to WP:RS - we're not just looking for website mentions, but for reliable critical writing. So, a teenidols website usually isn't going to qualify. - Philippe | Talk 18:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC) ITHINK HE SHOULD BE ADDED, As many poets have said, no one is insighfacant. User: Koolo--Koolo 15:54, 2 October 2007 (UTC) I don't believe that any poet has ever said "No one is insighfacant." In fact, I googled the phrase, and got zero hits. -FisherQueen (Talk) 15:59, 2 October 2007 (UTC) Sorta rolls right off your tongue, doesn't it? - Philippe | Talk 18:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC) I believe he means to say "no one is insignificant". I looked it up and found a lot of sites. I will countinue to try to find 3 sites. User: Icerainbow --Icerainbow 19:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC) I have a propasal. Why don't you and i and Koolo work toghther to find more info on jeff sutton. If you like this idea, tell me here or on my talk page and inform Koolo.--Icerainbow 02:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)I will help if you want.--Koolo 15:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC) You should feel free to work with whomever you want - that's part of being a wiki. However, we're still going to need reliable sources to establish notability. - Philippe | Talk 20:19, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Here is some sites. Tell me if they are enough.--Icerainbow 03:08, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[25] [26][27][28][29]. Speedy deletion of stub articles Hi, I am nyuwagner and you marked two pages of mine for speedy deletion last week. I am new to wikipedia and wanted to talk to you before re-creating. I created two entries, one for the Institute for Civil Infrastructure Systems and one for Institute for Education and Social Policy. Both are educational entities that perform research and are endowed through New York University. I was going to expand on the stubs later, but for now just wanted people to know that these institutions disperse funds on behalf of NYU and what their research focus is. Would a more detailed article help? There is no doubt as to the significance of unique research entities in my mind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyuwagner (talk • contribs) 16:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC) Answered on the user's talk page. - Philippe | Talk 18:52, 2 October 2007 (UTC) To reply... ...to you comment about CSCWEM's length, that name is easy to remember, while that name was most certainly not. It makes it unduly difficult to identify the user by their username. The Hybrid 04:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC) ding! email for you :) ~Eliz81(C) 04:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC) Responded by email right back atcha. ;-) - Philippe | Talk 14:39, 3 October 2007 (UTC) Abi Branning/Lorna Fitzgerald Abi Branning is cuddly. Adorable Lorna Fitzgerald, the enormously talented girl that plays darling Abi, is sparkly. Magical Abi/Lorna (more or less interchangable) is EXTREMELY ADORABLE. Don't you just want to put your arms around her, philippe ? I'd like to curl up with Abi and adore her. Hybrid theory rules, and I got an A in A-Level Further Maths. HAHA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Everything's Magic (talk • contribs) 01:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Just... yuck. I wish I could show this boy's mother his Wikipedia history. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Boy needs to get a hobby. Take up flying kites or something... - Philippe | Talk 16:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Ever heard of glass houses and stones phillipe ? I'd say that someone who is an administrator on wikipedia doesn't really have a leg to stand on when talking about the need to get a hobby. Actually, I have a great deal of hobbies. I'm very heaviliy involved in both attending and running of and various investment banking and finance soceities, I play football, tennis, and I'm into drama and literature, both reading and writing my own prose and poetry. Flying kites does suck though. I have a very active social life with many good friends, and yes, I am also VERY good at maths (but then again I'm good at every subject - 9A*s at GCSE, 5As at AS, 4 As at A2). Do you get linear algebra, philippe ? I do. Yes, I also happen to think that a little girl is a real sweetie and enjoy registering this opinion on wikipedia from time to time, I don't see why my mum would be so shocked at my wikipedia history, FisherQueen. Abi Branning, and her actress Lorna Fitzgerald are cute and magical, sparkly and as pure as gold. FTSE100 15:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Thanks! Appreciate your time and input very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.122.243.17 (talk) 17:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Concerning Anon I don't like seeing anon attacking anyone outside the confines of the Talk:Frida Kahlo page, both of you have done a great job, but he's not paying attention to any of us. Perhaps its time to block that troll. I would if I were an administrator. Modernist 21:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Hi Modernist, and thanks for your comment. This one is kind of an ugly one - I can't believe anyone would stoop to attacking one of our most dedicated administrator over their age! I've issued a final warning to the anon, and if they keep it up, I will block them. Thanks for your patience in dealing with this person. - Philippe | Talk 22:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC) I just reverted some more BS from him about Anonymous Dissent, at Talk:Frida Kahlo, why is this guy still around? Its time. Modernist 03:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC) I'm sorry, but I disagree with your revert. He was pointing out a valid discussion about the issue. Sure, I wasn't fond of his tone. I see no reason for you to have reverted that comment. At this point, I see no reason to block him either. I did issue a final warning. I haven't seen any attack language from him since. He's certainly using strong talk, but it's not attacking anymore - Philippe | Talk 03:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Respectfully we disagree, but I sincerely hope that you are right and I'm misjudging him. I think he's playing a game. Modernist 03:17, 5 October 2007 (UTC) The good thing is, this is a wiki. He can't do anything that can't be undone. If I'm wrong, I'll be the first to block him. :-) - Philippe | Talk 03:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC) And I was, in fact, the first to block him. I got him for trolling. - Philippe | Talk 04:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Ty :) Modernist 04:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Re-protect Cold War article? It's just not going to be safe from vandalism. Hires an editor 10:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Done. I put a month on it. Let me know if it needs to be longer. - Philippe | Talk 14:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Glass houses and stones Ever heard of glass houses and stones phillipe ? I'd say that someone who is an administrator on wikipedia doesn't really have a leg to stand on when talking about the need to get a hobby. Actually, I have a great deal of hobbies. I'm very heaviliy involved in both attending and running of and various investment banking and finance soceities, I play football, tennis, and I'm into drama and literature, both reading and writing my own prose and poetry. Flying kites does suck though. I have a very active social life with many good friends, and yes, I am also VERY good at maths (but then again I'm good at every subject - 9A*s at GCSE, 5As at AS, 4 As at A2). Do you get linear algebra, philippe ? I do. Yes, I also happen to think that a little girl is a real sweetie and enjoy registering this opinion on wikipedia from time to time, I don't see why my mum would be so shocked at my wikipedia history, FisherQueen. Abi Branning, and her actress Lorna Fitzgerald are cute and magical, sparkly and as pure as gold. FTSE100 15:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC) I'll agree that you have a hobby - it's to come on here and troll. Frankly, it's fine with me that you feel it necessary to check in every once in a while - better that than not, because at least we know where you are. I think FisherQueen would agree with me that we appreciate the fact that you register your socks with us. Besides, I've grown rather fond of you. I'd miss you if you weren't around. I sure wish you'd lay off the creepy statements about the little girl, though. - Philippe | Talk 16:14, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Yes, as vandals and trolls go, this one is harmless enough, though I am truly concerned that the creepy statements about cuddling little girls might be a sign of desires that are inappropriate and wrong, and would urge you to share your edits with your mother, so the two of you can decide whether therapy would be appropriate. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC) apologize I wanted to apologize for the comment I left about you on that RFCN. I withdrew it and announced my poor choice of words on there. 68.143.88.2 19:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC) No worries, and no hard feelings. Thanks for your hard work - sometimes it's hard to fight for an underdog, but it always needs to be done, and I admire you for doing it. - Philippe | Talk 19:42, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Arbitron market templates Regarding your deletion of List of United States radio markets, I wholeheartedly support your action. However, is there someway to temporarily restore and or send me a copy of the list? All I need is the template names for each market, as I'm in the process of attempting to clean them up. As there is now no central location that lists the names of the templates for each market (which I will probably utilize a category for), I have no way to start, short of guess and check, etc. Is there anyway you might be able to help me? Any help is much appreciated! JPG-GR 20:41, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Sure, if you'll email me at philippe.wiki@gmail.com, I'll email you a copy of it. I'd prefer not to post it on wiki, because I just got rid of it for copyright infringement. :-) - Philippe | Talk 21:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Email sent. JPG-GR 17:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC) And I have responded. Good luck! - Philippe | Talk 18:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC) Massacre at Sand Creek Thanks for the protection! Afaprof01 21:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Happy to help. Let me know if there's anything else I can do. - Philippe | Talk 21:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC) WikiProject Oklahoma Newsletter October 07 The WikiOkie Reporter WikiProject Oklahoma's Newsletter Issue 2 - October 2007 Edit this newsletter Discuss this newsletter Your second or third stop for WikiProject Oklahoma News Sign up to receive this newsletter Oklahoma Portal Current article statistics Past issues of this newsletter Modest boost in assessed articles during September WikiProject Oklahoma's massive list of unassessed articles got smaller over the month of September, as 45 articles were assessed by bots and editors. Assessments made on August 31 bring the total to 62 assessed articles over the 31-day period. On September 15, BetacommandBot assessed 40 articles from no-class to stub and start class. This bot automatically updates the talk pages of articles included in more than one WikiProject if at least one WikiProject has already assessed the material, bringing each interested WikiProject's ratings into compliance with the assessment. No B-class or higher quality assessments were given out over September, and only a small handful of importance assessments were granted. On August 31, one Low, Mid, and High importance rating was given to three separate articles. Leroy McGuirk was given the lone high-importance rating. Oklahoma categories receive help from Texan TexasAndroid, an administrator, assisted WikiProject Oklahoma by categorizing nearly 100 Oklahoma-related pages on September 24. The additions were made mainly to Tulsa-related pages. "I've done the major cities in Texas in the past, and was thinking about what to do next, and decided to stay relatively close to home for now. Thus OK's big cities got done," TexasAndroid wrote on his user page. Meet WikiProject Oklahoma's "sub-project" Taskforce Tulsa, a collaboration of editors operating under WikiProject Oklahoma, has been created to increase the scope of Wikipedia's coverage of Tulsa and its surrounding areas. Taskforce Tulsa is many things, but most importantly, it is a way for editors to have a place to put Tulsa-related requests (pictures, article, expansion, collaboration) for other editors interested in Tulsa. News, guidelines, and category trees related to Tulsa articles can easily be accessed and added through the task force's project page. The taskforce is not its own WikiProject. Instead, it works in conjunction with WikiProject Oklahoma to increase the quality and scope of Tulsa-related material. Because of the increased clutter and unnecessary waste of space that would be created with a new WikiProject, editors have opted for a taskforce, or workgroup project. Rather than having a Wikiproject Oklahoma banner as well as a Wikiproject Tulsa banner on most Tulsa-related pages, editors can simply add the Tulsa Taskforce note onto the existing Wikiproject Oklahoma banner. Cleaner, clearer, and more efficient. In edit mode, such a banner would appear as this: "{{WikiProject Oklahoma|class=FA|importance=Top|tulsa-task-force=yes}}". In other words, simply adding "tulsa-task-force=yes}}" to the existing Wikiproject Oklahoma banner on an article's talk page would include that article into the Tulsa Task Force. According to an explanation on the taskforce's project page, "The Tulsa Task Force is a 'sub-wikiproject' operating 'beneath' Wikiproject Oklahoma, and is designed to assist it by focusing specifically on Tulsa-related material. Editors who are interested in expanding knowledge of Tulsa on Wikipedia may wish to consider themselves part of Taskforce Tulsa as well as Wikiproject Oklahoma." Interested parties can sign up much like a stand-alone WikiProject. This month's task: Get out of your routine. Make some edits! • Edit next month's newsletter The WikiProject Oklahoma newsletter is a work in progress so please share your ideas about how the newsletter can be improved. If you no longer wish to receive this newsletter, please remove your name from the sign-up list. This newsletter was delivered to you by Okiefromokla. If you would no longer like to receive this in your talk page, please remove your name from the sign-up list. Thanks! Deleting Sohan Singh Bhakna Hello Phillippe, you deleted an article on Sohan Singh Bhakna that I created last night asserting it did not have significane, without either informing me or inviting a discussion. I am deeply disaapointed at the lack of wikiquette and unilateral assumption of responsibility and significance that I believe also violated the wikipedia deletions policy. I had provided a reference, and in addition had a number of other references, including peer reviewed journals which I intended to use to expand on the article. I must ask you to follow established guidelines and show more courtesy towards your fellow editors, as well as informing the article's creators when nominating for deletion.Rueben lys 00:06, 6 October 2007 (UTC) HI there - the article was tagged for speedy deletion at 23:11 last night - not by me. I didn't delete it until almost 5 hours later, which gave you significant time to improve it. I didn't "assume" responsibility - I did what every administrator does: cleaned out the speedy deletion lists. That's what we've been asked by the community to do. I followed established guidelines exactly. I'd be pleased to restore the article to your userspace to give you time to flesh it out, if you'd like, particularly to put in information that asserts notability. When you are done with it, I'd be happy then to move it out to the encyclopedia for you. - Philippe | Talk 16:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC) Hi Phillippe, my apologies. I thought you tagged and deleted the article. I have re-created the article to what I believe is at least a stub level, so restoring wont be neccessary. Thanks for the offer of help though. regardsRueben lys 22:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC) Disgusted Philippe, who elected you pope of this dump? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Worldclips (talk • contribs) I had no idea we had a pope of Wikipedia. I should run for that. If you're asking who elected me as an administrator, well the answer is "about 65 people, who participated at my RFA. You should feel free to participate there as well - your input is greatly appreciated". If, as I suspect, you're really upset because I deleted a page of yours, you should know that the page in question was tagged by one of our contributors as potentially being a biographical article that did not assert the notability of the subject in compliance with our guidelines. When I got to that article in the list, I looked at it, and agree with the user who tagged it for speedy deletion, so I deleted it. I'd be happy to restore it to your user-space if you'd like so that you can continue to work on it, and then to move it back into the encyclopedia when you've met our requirements. I would also remind you that you're far more likely to get help with a simple question than with a sarcastic one... - Philippe | Talk 17:35, 7 October 2007 (UTC) I think you'd be a wonderful pope. Our current pope wears robes by Armani, I've heard. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC) It's sort of my dream job. Dress up and do music and all sorts of stuff with pomp and circumstance. Who can beat that? - Philippe | Talk 18:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC) I'd be Pope of Wikipedia just for the cool hats and the wicked cool staff. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 03:33, 9 October 2007 (UTC) WikiProject Oklahoma Newsletter October 07 The WikiOkie Reporter WikiProject Oklahoma's Newsletter Issue 2 - October 2007 Edit this newsletter Discuss this newsletter Your second or third stop for WikiProject Oklahoma News Sign up to receive this newsletter Oklahoma Portal Current article statistics Past issues of this newsletter Modest boost in assessed articles during September WikiProject Oklahoma's massive list of unassessed articles got smaller over the month of September, as 45 articles were assessed by bots and editors. Assessments made on August 31 bring the total to 62 assessed articles over the 31-day period. On September 15, BetacommandBot assessed 40 articles from no-class to stub and start class. This bot automatically updates the talk pages of articles included in more than one WikiProject if at least one WikiProject has already assessed the material, bringing each interested WikiProject's ratings into compliance with the assessment. No B-class or higher quality assessments were given out over September, and only a small handful of importance assessments were granted. On August 31, one Low, Mid, and High importance rating was given to three separate articles. Leroy McGuirk was given the lone high-importance rating. Oklahoma categories receive help from Texan TexasAndroid, an administrator, assisted WikiProject Oklahoma by categorizing nearly 100 Oklahoma-related pages on September 24. The additions were made mainly to Tulsa-related pages. "I've done the major cities in Texas in the past, and was thinking about what to do next, and decided to stay relatively close to home for now. Thus OK's big cities got done," TexasAndroid wrote on his user page. Meet WikiProject Oklahoma's "sub-project" Taskforce Tulsa, a collaboration of editors operating under WikiProject Oklahoma, has been created to increase the scope of Wikipedia's coverage of Tulsa and its surrounding areas. Taskforce Tulsa is many things, but most importantly, it is a way for editors to have a place to put Tulsa-related requests (pictures, article, expansion, collaboration) for other editors interested in Tulsa. News, guidelines, and category trees related to Tulsa articles can easily be accessed and added through the task force's project page. The taskforce is not its own WikiProject. Instead, it works in conjunction with WikiProject Oklahoma to increase the quality and scope of Tulsa-related material. Because of the increased clutter and unnecessary waste of space that would be created with a new WikiProject, editors have opted for a taskforce, or workgroup project. Rather than having a Wikiproject Oklahoma banner as well as a Wikiproject Tulsa banner on most Tulsa-related pages, editors can simply add the Tulsa Taskforce note onto the existing Wikiproject Oklahoma banner. Cleaner, clearer, and more efficient. In edit mode, such a banner would appear as this: "{{WikiProject Oklahoma|class=FA|importance=Top|tulsa-task-force=yes}}". In other words, simply adding "tulsa-task-force=yes}}" to the existing Wikiproject Oklahoma banner on an article's talk page would include that article into the Tulsa Task Force. According to an explanation on the taskforce's project page, "The Tulsa Task Force is a 'sub-wikiproject' operating 'beneath' Wikiproject Oklahoma, and is designed to assist it by focusing specifically on Tulsa-related material. Editors who are interested in expanding knowledge of Tulsa on Wikipedia may wish to consider themselves part of Taskforce Tulsa as well as Wikiproject Oklahoma." Interested parties can sign up much like a stand-alone WikiProject. This month's task: Get out of your routine. Make some edits! • Edit next month's newsletter The WikiProject Oklahoma newsletter is a work in progress so please share your ideas about how the newsletter can be improved. If you no longer wish to receive this newsletter, please remove your name from the sign-up list. This newsletter was delivered to you by Okiefromokla. This is a one-time delivery to all Wikiproject Oklahoma members to boost interest in the newsletter. In the future, if you would like to receive this newsletter in your talk page, please insert your name in the sign-up list. Thanks! Congratulations! File:Robot asimo cropped.jpg Congratulations from one of your robot fans. On making sure that Wikipedia is a robotic zone! Congrats! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.165.125.29 (talk) 23:02, 7 October 2007 (UTC) Everybody loves robots, after all. Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto! -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC) When I'm king of the world, robots will do my cooking. Until then, admin tasks. - Philippe | Talk 23:12, 7 October 2007 (UTC) I removed a comment from your page, that could be a slight personal attack. - Rjd0060 00:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC) Thanks! That's a twitty little troll. - Philippe | Talk 02:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC) Heavy Brother I am not sure why I am not entitled to know who the primary account holder is - I filed the account to know if the attack account was created by someone with whom I have had a dispute with before. I was the sole subject of this attack account who filed two separate 3RR complaints, one of which was completely erroneous. It was clearly someone I have had contact and possible disputes with, and I think i have a right to know at least the true username of someone stalking my edits. I have never received any contact from Heavy Brother, despite the little song and dance he did for the admins, talking about how he was going to contact me, apologizing for the false 3RR. Usually, someone who creates a sock account incorrectly, if reinstated, clearly identifies the doppleganger nature of the account and the parent. A private account used solely to attack another user doesn't seem to be in keeping with the spirit of Wikipedia. I should have a right to know which user is specifically not employing AGF when it comes to me, so I can either avoid or be prepared against their attack efforts. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 03:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC) The only person still keeping this alive is you. That user did exactly what I told them to: ceased using that account immediately upon finding out that it was not allowed as a single-purpose account. There have been no contributions since 9/25 from that account. This matter is closed. There is no further need for you to keep this alive. - Philippe | Talk 14:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC) Okay, maybe the primary user stopped using that particular account for attacking me. However, without knowing who they are, who's to say they won't just set up another account in the future if I by their perceptions step on their shoes? I don't care about this user's sock account; I want to know who the primary is so I can be on guard. You guys certainly aren't going to monitor the user in the future. Why don't I have the right to know who set up a single-purpose attack account? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC) First of all, we're not going to go on a fishing expedition... Checkuser isn't going to tell you who else used that IP address. Second of all, I'm not going to support leaving this issue open. If you believe that someone is harassing you, I'm happy to look into that, but I'm not going to allow this issue to fester. - Philippe | Talk 20:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC) In response, my inquiry wasn't a fishing expedition - it was an attempt to identify who was using an illegal, anonymous sock-puppet to stalk my edits and harass me, which I think is a pretty valid description of the person's actions. I supplied two of three possible persons who I thought might be using the sock so as to make it easier to identify the sock. The checkuser is supposed to confirm if one of the users in question was using the sock. That process was interrupted before it could be resolved. As well, I do belive that the presence of a single-purpose sock account used to target me fairly fulfills the criteria of harassment, but as I don't know the results of the checkuser, I am unsure as to where the harassment is coming from. Three account-holders immediately come to mind, but without the results of the checkuser, any such accusation would be inverified. I don't want this to fester, either, Philippe, but I have the right to know what primary account felt the need to harass me in such a fashion. If it was an admin, their behavior is de-sys-op worthy, as an admin should know what an illegal sock is. If it is an experienced editor, they also know the ethics of creating illegal socks. If it is a new user, then they need mentoring. In any case, I want to know, so I can be on my guard. This situation is analagous to being stalked, and your response is akin to asking me to just forget about it in the hopes that the stalker will lose interest and focus their attentions elsewhere. Of course, that is an incorrect assumption. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:48, 9 October 2007 (UTC) Let me say clearly, in case I haven't previously: I absolutely understand your frustration, and know that I would share it if I were in your situation. It occurs to me that in this entire conversation, I haven't really said that to you. Then, next, let me also say clearly that the user in question was not a sysop - unless of course there's something even stranger than I know going on. I can say, however, with 99% certainty (leaving that 1% chance for the really odd one-in-a-million chance) that the user is not a sysop. I will also tell you that the user in question now knows the gravity of their action, and that it is, in my opinion, best for the encyclopedia that we move on from this issue. I can say with some certainty that the user in question will not engage in that type of behavior again. Third, as for harassment: I will accept an argument of harassment and look into it more clearly if you can demonstrate that you have been damaged, in some way beyond the simple filing of false reports. I know it's frustrating, but it's not the end of the world. I'm going to ask you to take a deep breath and move on. The situation is resolved. Finally, you seem concerned that no one may be following up on this situation. Put that fear to rest - I'm watching the user in question closely, and if they step out of bounds again, they understand clearly that there will be real and definite consequences. This community has empowered me, as an administrator, with some discretion, and I've chosen to exercise it in this case. I believe a potentially positive contributor stepped out of line - they got their wrist slapped firmly, and are back within the grounds of good online etiquette. I think that, at least so far, handling of the situation has resulted in a net gain for the encyclopedia, and I stand by my actions. I know it's frustrating - I'd be frustrated, too. Please understand that I'm honestly doing what I think is best here. If you'd like, I'd be happy to get the opinion of another admin. There are several who would be pleased to look at the situation from a neutral point of view and I'd be pleased to ask any of them for a second opinion. - Philippe | Talk 22:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC) No, i don't think consulting another admin in this matter is going to be necessary. While I am displeased in the extreme over the actions of the primary user (and their subsequent reticence to cowboy up and announce themselves) as well as the actions of not-very-neutral admin FuturePerfect to shut down the inquiry (as he was the admin who followed the initial 3RR claim to block me) to shut down the checkuser inquiry and minimize his own culpability. I am willing to take you at your word that you will keep an eye on the user. I think that it is fair to ask that if a second violation comes to pass, that I be notified of the primary account-holder's handle right away - as I will ask for the person to be removed from the community permanently (as keel-hauling seems a bit extreme). I certainly hope that the user has learned their lesson, and can otherwise contribute in a beneficial way to the community. So, I will move on from this. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 23:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC) NShadow1993 Give NShadow1993 (talk · contribs)'s previous history of vandalism, warnings, and a previous short blocks, I have extended the block to indefinite. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 20:07, 9 October 2007 (UTC) OK by me. Thanks for letting me know! - Philippe | Talk 20:34, 9 October 2007 (UTC) In_Rainbows Hi I was told by someone on the unprotection request page to come and talk to you. You protected In Rainbows because of vandalism but there isn't any vandalism on it. Replenished entry 23:30, 10 October 2007 (UTC) Eh, you know, "vandalism" was a really bad word choice there. I accept responsibility for that. However, I stand by the protection - the cover art was becoming a nightmare, there were sourcing issues, and wayyyy too many reverts as a result of them. It's just semi-protection, established users should still be able to edit the page. - Philippe | Talk 03:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC) How is it possible to semi protect a page because of "Crazy vandalism" that turns out not to be "crazy" vandalsim after all. I could buy that if you'd put "looks like vandalism" or "might be some vandalism here" but "crazy vandalism" really implies you've had a good look at it and it's not just normal vandalism. It suggests you've been so struck by how bad it is that you've gone out of your way to write that it's "crazy". Changing your mind now just smacks of back tracking to find a reason to keep it semi protected. In any case, I don't see how the policy says you can semi protect a page for the reasons you've given. "The cover art was becoming a nightmare" The blank cover art image invited people to upload cover art so they did. It wasn't malicious, it was good faith adding of cover art because the page said to. Anyway, after some comments I left on the discussion page someone's reduced the size of the cover art template to 0, so it doesn't sit there shouting "PLEASE UPLOAD COVER ART TO THIS PAGE". That's a much better solution than semi protecting the page. Problem solved by applying brain rather than having to semi protect. I reckon a template that says "Album has no cover art, don't upload any until it has some" or something along those lines would be a good idea as well. "There were sourcing issues" What sourcing issues? Out of the 106 edits since the album came out, how many are sourcing issues and how many are serious enough to protect a page. Come to think of it, is "sourcing issues" even a reason to protect a page. Aren't you supposed to request sources!!! "Way too many reverts" How many were reverted and how many were reverted from users that were less than 3 days old or IP accounts? "It's just semi protection" The policy doesn't say it's OK to semi protect a page for reasons that aren't part of the policy because it's "only" semi protection Replenished entry 05:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC) I'd like to thank you for your comments. In cases like this, wide discretion is typically given to administrators, and I think it's best used in this case. I'll happily take a few minutes later today to re-evaluate that page. Can't do it now, on my way out to work. Right now, I think the semi-protection is best left on, but I'll re-evaluate it later today. - Philippe | Talk 13:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC) National Civilian Community Corps Thank you for your action and for your comments. We were at the point of not knowing what to do next to try to get things under control. Hopefully this will help. Dbiel (Talk) 04:52, 11 October 2007 (UTC) No worries, please feel free to let me know if I can help any more... if this doesn't resolve it, let me know. Best of luck. - Philippe | Talk 04:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC) Hello Philippe. I would like to request examination for a possible user block at this time (User: Coterminous). You can examine the NCCC talk page and see that we are at a complete impasse with a new user who insists on unilaterally re-writing wikipedia rules (examination of the archived talk page will shed further light on this) Please feel free to contact me directly with anything. --LoverOfArt 17:26, 11 October 2007 (UTC) I have reviewed the talk page, and come to the conclusion that the bounds of our policies on civility have been severly tested. I left a final warning about personal attacks on the user's talk page. I still believe it's possible to come to an understanding about this page, and encourage you to investigate Wikipedia's dispute resolution procedures and consider mediation. If the boundaries of good taste or etiquette are crossed again, I will not hesitate to issue appropriate blocks. I hope that all parties involved will come to the table ready to discuss and come to an agreement. Thank you for keeping me notified about this process, and good luck! - Philippe | Talk 19:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC) Thank your for your assistance. We are trying to move slowly up the dispute resolution process, it current is in process at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-10-05 National Civilian Community Corps. I just do not want to push the process too fast. Dbiel (Talk) 20:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC) Not sure how to proceed, but did want to give you an update. User:Coterminous has ignored all requests related to mediation including not even responding to my request for him to express his views on the subject, posted on the article talk page as well as on his own talk page. His edit summary response regarding working together on one very difficult section was: National Civilian Community Corps/Criticisms of the National Civilian Community Corps‎; 19:30 . . (-1,678) . . User:72.75.55.211 (Talk) (Deleted My Copy from this page - I consider it an Insult to be listed in the same company as LoverofArt (signed: Coterminous)) As noted, he failed to log in prior to posting but did manually sign the post. Any suggestions on what to try next, if anything? Dbiel (Talk) 04:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC) I have responded to the query about mediation at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:National_Civilian_Community_Corps I don't live online at the Wikipedia site - I get to it when I can. So, rushes to judgment would, as usual, be ill-advised. Philippe, I don't know how much of the archived discussion you had a chance to review, to see what led to my post. You may not feel you need to, but had I posted the remarks and editorial tactics of LoverOfArt, he would be under consideration for blockage from Wikipedia, not me.Coterminous 12:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Regarding this issue: "What's going on? Coterminous is a new Wikipedia user and doesn't fully understand what is appropriate for this site. .... LoverofArt has posted false and misleading and defamatory information about NCCC at the Wikipedia site and resorted to repeated vitriolic personal attacks on Coterminous which finally prompted an angry response." The above statement is not a wild accusation from a fool. I once helped copyedit for publication a book by Senator Moynihan of New York. LoverofArt shows blatant disregard either for editorial honesty or accuracy, with the net result being grossly negative and inaccurate statements about NCCC posted at the Wikipedia NCCC site by LoverofArt. His ugly rants against me, combined with the false and misleading information he has posted, combined into a toxic brew. Please tell him and his cohorts to back off the "chastising" of me, as Che Nuevera puts it, and focus on content.Coterminous 13:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia Regrets The Errors From June to September of 2007, several false and misleading critical statements appeared at the National Civilian Community Corps (also known as AmeriCorps NCCC) page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Civilian_Community_Corps), in violation of Wikipedia standards. This is the false text as it appeared: National Civilian Community Corps "...Criticisms The NCCC program has met with sharp criticisms from some fiscal conservatives who accused it of being a "boondoggle".[4] Most notably, Libertarian pundit and commentator James Bovard has been one of the most vocal Americorps NCCC opponents, calling it a "waste and fraud"[5], in addition to dedicating an entire chapter of criticisms of the program in his book "Feeling Your Pain: The Explosion and Abuse of Government Power in the Clinton-Gore Years." Robert Sweet, the former director of the National Institute of Education, labeled it "a fraud". ^ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,188385,00.html ^ http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1000americorps.htm" Wikipedia relies on its readers and volunteer contributors to avoid or challenge and correct misleading or false information. The following has been called to our attention: 1. The statement that read "...Bovard has been one of the most vocal Americorps NCCC opponents, calling it a "waste and fraud," cited as its source an article at this address by Bovard: http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1000americorps.htm Nowhere in that article does Bovard make that statement. No mention of "AmeriCorps NCCC" nor of the "National Civilian Community Corps" appears in that article, nor is AmeriCorps NCCC called a 'waste and fraud." We regret the error. 2. The same sentence went on to state the following: "...Bovard has been one of the most vocal Americorps NCCC opponents, calling it a "waste and fraud", in addition to dedicating an entire chapter of criticisms of the program in his book "Feeling Your Pain ..." Upon investigation, this statement turns out to be untrue. Bovard's book (published in hardcover by St. Martin's press) does not contain a chapter of criticisms of AmeriCorps NCCC in the book "Feeling Your Pain. In fact, neither "AmeriCorps NCCC" nor the "National Civilian Community Corps are mentioned at all in the text of that book nor in the book index. (The chapter in question concerns the umbrella program, AmeriCorps, but does not mention the program known as "AmeriCorps NCCC'" or the "National Civilian Community Corps". (The only mention to NCCC is in the footnotes, referring to a speech by then-president Clinton, praising, not criticizing, the NCCC.) In sum, the book "Feeling Your Pain" does not dedicate "an entire chapter of criticisms" of AmeriCorps NCCC, contrary to the information posted at the Wikipedia website. We regret the error. 3. Also untrue was the sentence "Robert Sweet, the former director of the National Institute of Education, labeled it [i.e., AmeriCorps NCCC] "a fraud". This sentence was misleading and false. It was placed at the National Civilian Community Corps page and referred to the antecedent in the previous sentence, the AmeriCorps NCCC. The claim relied on the article by Bovard at http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1000americorps.htm. No mention of either the "National Civilian Community Corps" nor of "AmeriCorps NCCC" appears in that article. No evidence has been put forward to support the statement that Mr. Sweet ever labeled AmeriCorps NCCC a "fraud." We regret the error. Wikipedia deeply regrets that this misleading text appeared at our National Civilian Community Corps website and that it persisted for as long as it did. The editor responsible for its appearance and continued re-emergence will no longer have access to the National Civilian Community Corps Wikipedia entry. Signed: _____ [Philippe - Calls to move forward on the National Civilian Community Corps page, to be a team player, etc., would be better received if Wikipedia posted a note something like the above at the NCCC site - not to mention, it might restore Wikipedia's credibility on the subject. I don't know if there is a snowball's chance of that happening, but at least this gives you some information to process so you can evaluate the current situation. Given the nature of the NCCC - a substantial and serious component of U.S. disaster relief and mitigation capacity - and its recent near-demise following misleading claims like those posted at Wikipedia, the statement above is not written as amusement.]Coterminous 16:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC) This most recent 'fantasy oriented' post is emblematic of a large part of the reason why I requested this user be blocked. In addition to generally incorrect and inappropriate edits to the NCCC article all around, it's pretty apparent that we are dealing with a fairly severe personality disorder. You can start from square one with all of the patience and good faith that many of us have already extended and expended, but we've tried that (see discussion log) and it's utterly pointless. I'll renew my call for a permanent user and IP range block. --LoverOfArt 17:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Coterminous, you're right about one thing: there's not a snowball's chance in hell of anything like that being published by this encyclopedia, and certainly not under my signature. Administrators are not empowered to make statements such as you suggest, and I assure you that they are out of the norm for the project. I encourage you, for the final time, to take advantage of the dispute resolution procedures, beginning with mediation. If you do not accept mediation, other steps will have to be taken. - Philippe | Talk 19:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Something was just called to my attention that I missed in my skimming of this conversation. LoverOfArt, your description of someone as a "borderline personality disorder" is inappropriate and will not be tolerated. I will not allow personal attacks (or a professional judgment that you may or may not be professionally qualified to give, but it would be unethical to give under any circumstances) in an attempt to warn people away from personal attacks! - Philippe | Talk 16:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Ugly Personal Attacks - You Approve?? Good Morning, Philippe. The post above yours, by LoverofArt, is typical of his posts in my direction. An ugly personal attack, by a person who has in essence defamed a widely respected organization -- the National Civilian Community Corps -- by posting false and misleading information at the Wikipedia website. If your / Wikipedia's best idea is that what should happen next is that I enter into a prolonged dialogue with that person, hoping to reason with him/her, while he/she continues to exert control over content and issue ugly diatribes, then your processes leave a great deal to be desired. A responsible adult -- a real Editor -- should have interceded long ago. He/she and the others working over the NCCC text at this time seem to feel that any statement introduced by the phrase "According to ___," does not belong at Wikipedia. As I read it, there was objection at one of your pages to placing references at the end of that phrase rather than at the end of the quotation. Why an encyclopedia would have as a policy including bald claims (as if fact) without reference to the source in its text eludes me. It would give the impression that the encyclopedia had evaluated the statement, which is obviously not the case. I appreciate Wikipedia's effort to provide freely accessible information to the public. I am not impressed, however, by the response to gross errors made at the Wikipedia site. Your crew is attacking the messenger at least in part because it is the message that it does not like. A pretty sorry performance, which you seem to be joining by failing to address the issues I raise or the attacks on me. Pull LoverofArt out of this situation and I will join in a dispute resolution process regarding editing the NCCC site. I refuse to have further dealings with him/her.Coterminous 11:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Philippe, would it be possible to get some sort of a finite time frame on when we can proceed with this? A lot of effort and calls for cooperation have already been tried with this person (including those I've made myself), resulting in a necessary full page protection. It's apparent this user is utterly clueless about how Wikipedia works (as evidenced by their previous claims that they are not a "paid editor" of Wikipedia, or this most recent delusion of their own make-believe "formal Wikipedia statement") yet has shown a near complete disdain for the rules that govern the article and a total unwillingness as a new user to learn them and participate accordingly. There are serious WP:POV, WP:Notability and self promotion issues inserted by this user that presently plague the article. As much effort as we have all expended in trying to get him/her to understand the site a bit better, replies like the one above are what we get in return. I know we have full page protection for another few days. Do you think it would be possible to resolve this with a conclusion by that time? I hope that Coterminous completely changes into a new person and abandons his/her current method of operation, however, I'd wager a years pay against that happening and its very frustrating to see so much pointless 'effort' going into furthering a good faith, constructive dialog that has clearly shown that it won't have any positive result. --LoverOfArt 20:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC) LoverofArt, my patience has very nearly expired. Coterminous, I will not ask good faith editors to retire from discussions because you simply disagree with them. Your actions are bordering on disruptive, and I'm going to ask you to calm down and edit in good faith at this point, or you will be blocked from editing for disruption. - Philippe | Talk 14:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC) The following is not intended as disruptive - it is simply to show you what has gone on. This is a quote about me by LoverofArt, from Dbiel's page, where I posted it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dbiel "Borderline Lunacy I have never, ever in my history on Wikipedia, seen a more incohearant, jumbled, senseless, excessively long-winded, foaming-at-the-mouth sort of reply as I'm seeing here with this person (Coterminous). This individuals responses in the discussion section are nearly impossible to comprehend and so schizophrenic in their continuity that I seriously doubt anyone else is able to decipher their meaning as well. ... -LoverOfArt 04:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)" Would you feel comfortable being pressed into a joint editing venture with someone who expressed themselves to you in this fashion?Coterminous 21:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC) No one is pressing you into a joint venture. You are free to leave at any time. - Philippe | Talk 22:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC) That begs the question. You and your colleagues consistently argue that the only way forward is in dialogue or mediation with LoverofArt, a "good faith" editor, you say. Your words: "I will not ask good faith editors to retire from discussions because you simply disagree with them." Neither his attacks on me nor his editing technique show much "good faith." So, yes, you seem to be in effect pressing a joint venture - intimating that either I join with LoverofArt in working on this project or else depart or be blocked from the site. For all of the speculation about my supposed detriments, I have nonetheless managed to write for and be published by the Investigative Reporters and Editors Journal - more than once - a journal that is published by the respected School of Journalism at the University of Missouri in Columbia. My work was checked by the Executive Editor and staff -- some of the most competent fact checkers in the entire business. No organization likes critics, and the tendency to circle the wagons and define outsiders as illegitimate is predictable, understandable. But LoverofArt unfortunately defamed the wrong organization. Wikipedia would be mistaken to allow him to continue in that vein.Coterminous 22:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Good Faith (reverted well intentioned revert as unfortunately this represents the problem that needs to be dealt with, and as this is Philippe's page, he should have the option of handling it he chooses rather than reverting it for him) You (and your colleagues) consistently argue that the only way forward is in dialogue or mediation with LoverofArt, a "good faith" editor, so you say. (In your words: "I will not ask good faith editors to retire from discussions because you simply disagree with them.") You are mistaken: Neither LoverofArt's vicious attacks on me nor his malicious editing show "good faith." For all of the speculation about my supposed detriments, I have nonetheless managed to write for and be published by the Investigative Reporters and Editors Journal - more than once - a journal that is published by the respected School of Journalism at the University of Missouri in Columbia. My detailed reporting was checked personally by the IRE Executive Editor (and staff) -- some of the most competent professionals in the entire business. They not only welcomed lengthy documentation of work submitted, they required it. At this site, detailed information simply invites scorn and diatribes. My contempt for the combination of editorial garbage and under-the-belt attacks spewing from LoverofArt is absolute. He/she is a hack and a punk - I hope some day he/she gets what is coming to him/her, with interest. A fine representative of Wikipedia. Block away if you want, I won't be missing a thing, except the dirty feeling that comes from reading the crap emanating from that paragon of Good Faith, LoverofArt.Coterminous 04:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC) I hate to barge into someone Else's talk page, but I feel that I must. Coterminous, you MUST stop the personal attacks, if you wish, ignore the term "good faith editor" when applied to LoverOfArt; that is not the issue and besides your are taking the term out of its proper context. The issue is ANY editor who is working without disrupting Wikipedia will be allowed to edit as they choose regardless if the content is being disputed. Note, there are limits, such as profanity. Content disputes are handled on the article talk page, but WITHOUT personal attacks. It is OK to attack the content, not the editor. Please note that an editor can be grossly wrong in his/her content and still be acting in good faith. "Gross errors" have nothing to do with "good faith editing". Gross errors will NOT be permitted to remain in Wikipedia. They are dealt with in the normal editorial process, but not by attacking the editor who inserted them. So far you are the one who has refused to participate in the editorial process. You input would be useful and accepted, but ONLY if it comes WITHOUT personal attacks. Dbiel (Talk) 12:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC) And I think we're done here. Good reply, Dbiel, but my patience has been exhausted. Conterminous, you crossed the line with the line about "crap emanating from that paragon of Good Faith", which is a blatant violation of our civility policies. Take the next 48 hours to consider those policies. Once that time is over, your input is welcome, but insults are not. - Philippe | Talk 14:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Question Philippe, Apologies for not having meaningful content in the wike article we are putting together for Murchison Middle School in Austin, Tx. We are constructing this page incrementally... We are going to re-edit and add additional information - should we pass that by you before we add it to the wiki? Lenny Hi Lenny - no problem at all. What I'd suggest is that you create it in a sandbox page (for instance, if you click on the red link next to this, it will create a sandbox page in your user space ----> User:Lblumber/Sandbox <----- and once you're ready, leave me a note and I'll happily review it and make any suggestions, or move it out into the encyclopedia for you. - Philippe | Talk 01:41, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Phillipe, Can do - we're following the trail that was laid down by the high school we feed to at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anderson_High_School_%28Austin%2C_Texas%29 - We were mentioned as a feeder school at the bottom of that page and I was going to fill out the details. One question - I'd like to include an image of the middle school that's on the PTA website. We can get one of the PTA officials to email you with approval. How do y'all (remember, this is Texas...) want a release for this picture documented or phrased? Thanks again - Lenny Phillipe, I need to pester you again - is there a way you could restore the page you deleted and/or email it to me? Thanks! - Lenny Responded on the user's talk page, userfied the page in question, left image info and welcome template. - Philippe | Talk 02:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Phillipe, As they say at the explosives factory - Dynamite!... Many Thanks for restoring the page. We'll get busy on reading the docs, updating the page and then ping you when we're at a stopping point. On a separate thread - I've been turning into a Wiki evangelist lately. I belong to a local S&R dive team and I maintain a wiki on the team at http://www.lennyblumberg.com/TCEU. I would be very grateful if you could spend a minute or so looking it over and offering some quick suggestions for getting it up to Wiki standards. Since it's a private wiki, it's kinda loosey-goosey as far as presentation and format. I noticed that the Anderson High School has a particular template that's used for schools - are you aware of any such template for volunteer organizations such as these? Thanks! - Lenny Sure, I'll try to take a look at it in the next day or so and get back to you. Sounds like fun. :-) - Philippe | Talk 02:36, 12 October 2007 (UTC) I was under the impression that 'huge names for the sake of it' were a no-no. I figure I report it and let someone with a badge decide: if I'm right, I'm right, if I'm wrong I'm wrong, unless they're obviously a vandal. Just following percieved procedure. HalfShadow 03:47, 12 October 2007 (UTC) No worries, and no harm done (and by the way, someone else blocked him... I disagree, but hey, that's life). Under WP:U, we have issues with: Confusing usernames make it unduly difficult to identify users by their username. Misleading usernames imply relevant, misleading things about the user. Disruptive usernames disrupt or misuse Wikipedia, or imply an intent to do so. Promotional usernames attempt to promote a group or company on Wikipedia. Offensive usernames are likely to make harmonious editing difficult or impossible. Excessively long names go under "Confusing", but the trend right now is toward giving the user the benefit of the doubt and asking them to change rather than blocking, unless it's blatantly offensive. - Philippe | Talk 04:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC) LGBT WikiProject Newsletter Delivered on 17:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC). Thank you. I am not sure how often you check this, but thank you for warning me. I understand. I had just been trying to revert edits which also had death threats in them, but thank you for warning me, I will pay more attention next time. (NOTE: This message is not sarcastic.) JpGrB 15:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Also, may I ask one really quick favor? On the Only Built 4 Cuban Linx II page, there are many fake tracks at the bottom (one of which is the "death threat" mentioned above), while also listing websites that have nothing to do with the page. Is it possible to have these taken out of here? Thank you. JpGrB 15:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Although generally admins are loathe to make changes to a page which is fully protected, in this case there is substantial obvious vandalism, including the section you pointed out, which I have now removed from the page. In the future, it's probably best not to get into an edit war over things like this - it tends to just escalate the situation. Instead, post about it at the administrators' incident board and someone will take a look at it for you. - Philippe | Talk 16:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Ugh Say, has anyone explored the possibility of a range block in regards to a particular (seemingly) obsessive-compulsive editor?--Isotope23 talk 16:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Range blocks scare me. I haven't, because I'm not sure I'd do it right and the possibility for collateral damage is so huge. If there's someone smarter than I that wants to try it out, I'm sure I'd refer to said person as cuddly and adorable. - Philippe | Talk 19:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Heya I am trying to figure out where the template that shows the specific coloration changes to the Heroes (TV series) character (and everything else) template, which is using reverse-type text coloring in the infobox headers to distinguish itself. With other templates, I can usually find the material and fix it, but for some reason, it seems missing. Where do I find it? I've found the following self-described Heroes templates: Template:Heroes_character_box Template:Heroes_characters Template:Heroes - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Hmmm, are you perhaps referring to Template:Infobox Television? If not, can you rephrase the question? I'm not sure I understand. Thanks! - Philippe | Talk 21:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC) You might be interested in this I saw your comment on Mexican-American War edit summary. I've kept this pretty low-key just in case I've accused the wrong user, but I've got a checkuser process underway as well. BusterD 20:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Interesting, thank you! - Philippe | Talk 21:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Fan Mail Dear Phillipe: You are a jerk and a loser. Why couldn't you wait just a week before deleting the article Gabriel Luciano? I asked you to wait just a week, but no, you had to be a moron and delete it a freaking one a.m.? You need to get a life and get some friends. Sincerely, someone who hates you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gibert19 (talk • contribs) 15:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Dear Gilbert: You know, that's the kindest thing you've ever said to me. For the sake of discussion, though, I deleted the article because it failed to assert notability according to our policies. I mean, it REALLY failed. LOTS. Now, had you asked politely, I probably would have restored the article into your userspace to give you the opportunity to work on it someplace where it was safe. In fact, I'd probably STILL do that if you asked. Cuz that's the type of guy I am. - Philippe | Talk 22:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC) List of United States radio markets Noticed you were the admin who speedied List of United States radio markets as a copyvio ... seems to me that it's merely a listing of facts, and facts can't be copyrighted. Any way it can be restored? Blueboy96 23:59, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Hi there - the page, as I deleted it, was a substantial copy of a website [30], including ranks, exact market numbers, schedules, etc. It would probably not be eligible for a restore. However, I'd be happy to email the text of it to you (I hesitate to put it back on wiki, since my stand is that it's a copyvio) if you'd like to email me to request a copy at philippe.wiki@gmail.com. At that point, if you'd like to rewrite it in such a way that it's no longer a copyvio, I certainly wouldn't object to the page reappearing. Hope that's at least some help to you. - Philippe | Talk 00:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC) Block Sir, I would like to just thank you for exercising extra caution in the blocking my IP the other day when you perceived that I was making too many non-constructive edits. When it comes to a primary information source for millions of humans worldwide, you can't be too safe, eh? I noticed that after you had done so, another Admin Can't sleep, clown will eat me blocked my user talk page for a period of 6 weeks. (Sheesh!). Is that normal? Seems a bit extreme regardless of the offence. I noticed that said editor is taking a wikibreak and attributed the extreme reaction to some feelings of stress in his life. My immediate reaction was to extend my sincerest sympathy and try to cheer him up with warm thoughts, however upon finding that this editor's talk page was somehow protected, I realized that this would not be possible. Would you be so kind as to pass my sentiments along. You'll find that now as being unblocked, I have refrained from further editing so as to not cause more stress to yourself or other editors who might be offended by my view of things. The subjectivity of reality seems to be a concept that is too radical for this audience. Thanks again, I hope things are going well for yourself. You might try questioning your norms sometime. It is an extremely liberating experience. 72.225.36.158 01:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC) You know, I couldn't agree with you more. Questioning your norms is a great experience for everyone to go through. However, I'm not sure I'll ever think that adding an image of horse semen is really appropriate for an article about mayonaisse. I do appreciate your forbearance now, though. - Philippe | Talk 02:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC) Another Block :) Philipe, I have made two fairly cogent arguments (IMO) supporting the removal of the ejaculation video in Ejaculate. You blocked me very briefly because I was participating in WP:VAN blanking repeatedly without discussion. Makes sense, as I pointed out at the bottom of Talk:Ejaculation here [31]. However, how much discussion is required before someone can engage safely in an edit war? That is of course not my goal in the least, but the video is destructive to wikipedia, and if wikipedia is going to stand against the inevitable Citizendium or the eventually even tougher competition New World Encyclopedia, then I would argue that such things should be avoided. I established two reasons for this. 1st, I believe that the video is unattributed data, in that there is no authoritative citation present to indicate whether or not it is indicative of a real, normal, nor even common ejaculation. A donated video from the Kinsey Institute or similar would be more appropriate. 2nd, and this point is slowly becoming my primary point though it started off only distantly being of interest to me, the appropriateness of this video is not well argued. The arguments for it are very weak, and I believe the video is destructive in that it will lend further to the growing dismisal of wikipedia as a source of serious information. My analogy (crassly stated, I'm sorry) is that the GI_Tract and Defecate pages would not bennefit from a video of me defecating.Tgm1024 16:38, 13 October 2007 (UTC) I think you make good arguments. However, I diverge from you when you start to think it's okay to remove without discussion, or to engage in an edit war. The thing that makes us a good encyclopedia - beyond the obvious, the writing - is that we are a people of dialogue. Rather than engage in blind reverts, it's better to go through the dispute resolution steps that are available to you in an attempt to build consensus. Imagine the chaos that would ensue if all contributors decided "okay, we've talked about it enough, now I'm just going to revert to my favorite revision". So, while I personally agree with your base premise, I disagree with your tactics. - Philippe | Talk 18:40, 13 October 2007 (UTC) The blind reverts I've done are as you saw them, but otherwise you completely misunderstood me, but as I re-read my initial paragraph I can see how someone would take it the way you did, so I apologize. I'll be clear. I am not advocating nor am interested in an edit-war. Nor am I asking for wikipedian guidelines regarding it per se as if it were a valid technique. I was asking where the line was drawn for meeting discussion requirements. Your chaos supposition "okay, we've talked about it enough..." is actually a problem: what do you do both sides are at a deadlock? Look at the arguments in Talk:Ejaculation carefully. I believe the problem and motivations are as I described.Tgm1024 00:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC) Need help The talk page on Gynecomastia has become a cess pool of unimportant topics and talk, take a look at it and you will see what i mean. Could you please delete for me.--Iceglass 00:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC) Hmmm, looks fairly on topic to me... I'm not sure I'm comfortable deleting that. Can you explain why you think it should be? - Philippe | Talk 04:35, 14 October 2007 (UTC) Well they are not talking about how to improve the article anymore, just their own Gynecomastia that is why i think it should be deleted so we can start a new dicussion that is more apporite.--Iceglass 13:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC) You're welcome to try to redirect the conversation there, but I'm not sure there's precedent for deleting a whole talk page that is, at least tangentially, related to the topic at hand. - Philippe | Talk 18:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC) very well i understand.--Iceglass 20:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC) May I ask a favor? I was wondering if I could impose on you to take a few minutes and review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional diseases. I seem to be of the minority point of view and maybe you could either add support to keeping the list or help me see where I might be totally off base in my thinking. Thank you in advance. Additionally I would like to thank you for your assistance with National Civilian Community Corps Dbiel (Talk) 01:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC) You're welcome, and I'll take a look at that AFD just as soon as I get home from church tomorrow. Right now, I'm prying my eyes open, looking like someone from A Clockwork Orange. - Philippe | Talk 04:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC) And to add my voice to the clamoring throng seeking your assistance, I have this itch in the middle of my back that i can't reach. Could you get it for me? :P - Arcayne (cast a spell) 03:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC) I think you'll find that your itch has now gone away. I'm always happy to help. - Philippe | Talk 04:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC) You blocked me for trolling. Why? You wrote on my User talk:70.18.5.219 page: This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive comments. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did at Talk: Frida Kahlo, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. - Philippe | Talk 22:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC) So, whom I attacked causing you to block me, please, because I have no idea? At least you should have mentioned just one person, please! -70.18.5.219 11:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC) Advice? I recently made edits to Jonestown removing somethings that I explained in the talk page of said article. I do have some history of being called a vandal in my talk page. This is one of my first "major" contributions since the dispute of my vandalism. Since I removed somethings out of said article, I'm a little worried that they may accuse me of vandalism. I explained my reasoning behind my actions in the article's discussion page. I just want to make sure and have someone double check before other users get to it. All I want to know is if my edit was good or not. If the edit was not helpful or wrong let me know my faults for future reference. I'm still new to editing and would appreciate this guidance. I only ask because I am unsure myself on my edit. By the way I also edited it under my IP address before I logged in. Riffsofcobain 18:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC) Hi there - I agree with your edits, and appreciate that you told people in your edit summary to check the talk page. About the only thing I'd point out is that you did it as an IP and answered under your account name, but that's just a little picky thing and anyone who looks at the article history will figure it out quickly. I think you did everything correctly there. Good job! - Philippe | Talk 20:52, 14 October 2007 (UTC) User:AGNPH Thanks again. I hope you'll be around tomorrow when the block expires and he does it again. I am assuming the next block will be longer (a lot longer). But hopefully you'll be around whenver he does it again since you know about the situation already. - Rjd0060 01:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC) I expect that I will be here, but if I'm not, feel free to email me at philippe.wiki@gmail.com. I can hop on in a flash and I'm ALWAYS checking my email. - Philippe | Talk 02:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Great. Definitely will. Thanks. - Rjd0060 03:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Looking now (the AfD resulted in delete), the article was salted, so we may not have any problems. - Rjd0060 13:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Fabulous! I'm glad the AFD was delete, hopefully that'll cut this guy off, but I suspect he'll find another title to start it under and we'll be cleaning that up off and on for a while. - Philippe | Talk 14:36, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Is this related, or another admin extending your block? - Rjd0060 15:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Looks like they recreated the page, so another admin sent them indef, which is what I'd have done as well. - Philippe | Talk 15:51, 15 October 2007 (UTC) I see...I wonder which account he used. I checked the blocking admin's conrib's to try and find out but I didn't see it. - Rjd0060 15:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Griffith Review You're probably correct. Since there seems to be some national funding involved, there probably are some RS out there (although I couldn't turn up any), so I'm not going to AfD it. I've done by best to fix the article, and hopefully someone will turn up the refs at some point. Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 05:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Great - thanks for letting me know, and for your work on this article and so many others. - Philippe | Talk 14:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC) CSS_Corporation Just a note: I've tried speedying that before, but the tag was removed by an IP (the contrib history suggests the IP might not be a sock, based on a different level of interests). Hopefully this one will go through. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 16:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC) I elected to just handle that one the "old-fashioned way" and delete it myself. On further reflection, I don't need more input, it's clearly an advert.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 16:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC) NCCC I hope you agree that LoverOfArt's statements that "we are dealing with a fairly severe personality disorder" is also clearly inappropriate, particularly since I told him more than once that he was coming awfully close to personal attacks. I recognize that it is surely not your intention to condone such behavior, but I feel it's very important to impress upon LoverOfArt that there are no exceptions to WP:NPA. Cheers. - Che Nuevara 16:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC) I obviously read too quickly and did not see that statement. It is unacceptable, and I'll say so. - Philippe | Talk 16:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC) CoyoteBill I'm overturning your block on CoyoteBill - the account appears to be here only for vandalism and I have blocked it indefinably. If you feel I am in error, please re-block for whatever time you think is appropriate and I won't revert you. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 17:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC) OK by me, no worries, but thanks for letting me know. :-) - Philippe | Talk 17:43, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention - User:ActivelyOUT and User:HCSO Hello, Could you please assist me with understanding your recent decisions at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention? You say the User:HCSO is not used solely for promotion but all this user has done is create a user page which is a carbon copy of the website of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office. This user has done nothing but self-promotion. Secondly, you say that User:ActivelyOUT has only made one edit which it self reverted. It reverted an advert after I flagged it as such. But surely the number of edits is irrelevant. I reported it to usernames requiring administrator attention; not to vandals requiring user attention. Therefore the number of posts is irrelevant. This username is the name of a website and the only post has been to advertise that website. The username is therefore in breach of WP rules for usernames. I'm new here, so if I've got this wrong I'm happy to learn, but I would appreciate some clarification for your decision. Many Thanks. B1atv 22:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC) I actually didn't deal with HCSO - that was Neil.  :-) I didn't do anything about ActivelyOUT, because - contrary to what you expressed - the number of edits is NOT irrelevant. The trend right now is to not block a name until it's proven to be damaging the encyclopedia in some way. In this case, the name was in error, realized the error (with your help), and then self-reverted it. I honestly don't believe we'll have any other problems with them and the result was that we didn't have to block them. Blocks can be tremendously discouraging to a new user - I prefer to not to do them for folks in good faith, particularly if they are called on their error and self-revert. However, I *did* add the name to my list of folks to check on occasionally, and if I see issues, I'll take action then. I hope this makes sense - feel free to ask me if you have any other questions. - Philippe | Talk 22:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Thanks for this. It makes a lot of sense. I hope you didn't mind me asking. I simply wanted to understand the decisions to ensure I didn't make future reports un-necessarily. You've helped with that, and I can understand that "genuine mistakes" shouldn't be lumped with "deliberate spammers". Thanks again. B1atv 22:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC) No problem at all for asking - I'd rather people ask than sit and wonder. Thanks for helping out around here! :-) - Philippe | Talk 22:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Thanks Thank you for all your help regarding this user. It was and still is very much appreciated :D AngelOfSadness talk 23:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Absolutely - let me know if he acts up again. - Philippe | Talk 23:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Trust me I'll be watching him like a hawk like I have ever since I saw this. AngelOfSadness talk 23:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Yeah, that's the one that pissed me off too. I just noticed that I didn't actually indef block him, though, which is what I intended to do. I got distracted by the telephone. I'm off to fix that now. - Philippe | Talk 23:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Ahh I see. Cheers. I'm sure if he returns and does the exact same thing (vandalising the same articles, attacking the same editors(there's about three/four)), I'll be the first to report him. AngelOfSadness talk 23:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC) Can I get your feedback on this? I am kinda concerned that the connecting of the characters' abilities from Heroes to the list of comic book superpowers is OR by synthesis. I posted my concern here. What are your thoughts on the subject? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 03:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Well, I'm WAY out of my comfort area here - I don't know the subject matter at all. But, I would say that based on what I see, while I appreciate your concern, I think we're probably safe. If you went out and polled the superheros as to what their powers were, I'd say that's OR. But assuming you're taking it from reliable sources, I think we're in the clear. - Philippe | Talk 03:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC) User talk:AGNPH I was thinking maybe it could be speedied? Technically it falls under the 'talk' template:'It is a talk page of a page which has been deleted...' HalfShadow 03:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Well, I'm not really in the habit of deleting user talk pages. For one thing, they serve as a bit of history - although admins can see deleted revisions, a lot of our really splendid vandalfighters can't, and I hate to block that sort of history from them. I can see where it'd be a good idea, though - for right now, I'd prefer to leave it though. - Philippe | Talk 03:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Just a thought. I don't really care myself, but he's been permblocked and his page was deleted, so I figured... HalfShadow 03:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC) No problem at all. Thanks for everything you're doing - I see your name everywhere lately! - Philippe | Talk 04:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC) User:Shia Can you please take a look at User:Shia? I moved it to userspace where it came from but looking at the edit history I'm not sure that's right. --NeilN 04:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Yeah, good catch. It wasn't Shia - it looks like User:Enzuru started building his/her user page there and then realized it was wrong. It bears a resemblance to the current one. I just deleted it from User:Shia since I'm not sure it's really theirs. If I'm wrong, I'm sure they'll let me know. Good catch on your part!  :-) - Philippe | Talk 04:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC) No more cocktails? How about some pop instead? -Jéské(v^_^v) 04:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Probably would be a good idea <grin> - Philippe | Talk 14:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Hey. Hey. Thank you all for helping out. Becuase I (probably) suffered the most from that IP address, I,Goodshoped35110s, give you all the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar! (yay.) :) --Goodshoped35110s 04:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Thank you! I'm honored! - Philippe | Talk 14:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Please see my talk page .. for the most recent diatribe. Are we there yet? --LoverOfArt 05:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Yep, stick a fork in me, cuz i'm DONE. 48 hour block issued. - Philippe | Talk 14:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC) RfA Thanks Dear Philippe, ______ __ __ __ /\__ _\/\ \ /\ \ /\ \ \/_/\ \/\ \ \___ __ ___\ \ \/'\ __ __ ___ __ __\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _ `\ /'__`\ /' _ `\ \ , < /\ \/\ \ / __`\/\ \/\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \/\ \_\.\_/\ \/\ \ \ \\`\\ \ \_\ \/\ \_\ \ \ \_\ \\ \_\ \ \_\ \ \_\ \_\ \__/.\_\ \_\ \_\ \_\ \_\/`____ \ \____/\ \____/ \/\_\ \/_/ \/_/\/_/\/__/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/`/___/> \/___/ \/___/ \/_/ /\___/ \/__/ For your contribution to My RfA, which passed with 8000 Supports, 2 Neutrals and no opposes. The standards and dedication of the English Wikipeidan Administrators is excellent and I am privileged to stand among them. Thankyou for putting you trust in me, I'll not see it abused. And now, I will dance naked around a fire. Party at my place! Cheers! Dfrg.msc 09:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC) I'm just sayin, if that boy is honestly dancing naked around a fire, I'm bookin' a plane ticket. :-) - Philippe | Talk 18:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 42 15 October 2007 About the Signpost From the editor: Brion Vibber interview Wikimania 2008 awarded to Alexandria Board meeting held, budget approved Wikimedia Commons reaches two million media files San Francisco job openings published Community sanction noticeboard closed Bot is approved to delete redirects License edits under consideration to accommodate Wikipedia WikiWorld comic: "Soramimi Kashi" News and notes: Historian dies, Wiki Wednesdays, milestones Wikimedia in the News WikiProject Report: Military history Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 10:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC) 24.44.131.115 Hi, I saw that you blocked this IP address in the past for vandalism. Since then, there have been numerous warnings. Today, the user/IP went through many biography articles and changeed the birthdates. Is there anything you can do, or can you point me in the right direction to have this dealt with? Thanks. GaryColemanFan 23:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC) Hi GaryFan, and thanks for letting me know - I blocked the IP for a month. Pesky little guy, ain't he? - Philippe | Talk 03:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC) Any advice? Do you have any advice regarding this? The only reason I ask is because it appears that the editor has not only copied that userpage of an existing admin userpage but has been making a lot of non constructive edits lately most recent being an attack on Oxymoron's userpage. The user has stopped editing after final warning but I thought that the userpage was a problem. AngelOfSadness talk 16:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC) Good catch - I blocked him. Thanks! - Philippe | Talk 16:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC) No problemo. The smoke and red flags were popping up everywhere. I found him attacking oxymoron83, tried to revert the edit and put a warning on their page but I saw that this guy was supposedly an admin, with 40'000 edits to wikipedia and only had an edit history of thirteen. Anyway, thank you for blocking him :D AngelOfSadness talk 17:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC) Another quick question, should his userpage itself be replaced with an indef block template or should it be deleted as he attempted to impersonate an admin with it? AngelOfSadness talk 17:14, 18 October 2007 (UTC) Eh, you know, that's a REALLY good point. I think my preference is to revert it back to a "pre-impersonation" version, if there is one. If not, I'll just delete it. - Philippe | Talk 18:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC) Icairns, the editor whose userpage was copied by the vandal, has blanked it. There are two other revisions of the page which it can be reverted back to. Revision one says "I am 1337" and revision two is blank. Maybe it might be best left blank, hopefully no-one will revert it. AngelOfSadness talk 19:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC) In this case, I think Icairns should get to decide the fate of the page, and if he's comfortable blanking it, I support that totally. - Philippe | Talk 22:35, 18 October 2007 (UTC) RFP Sorry but Imaginationland is being overlooked on WP:RFP. It was pointed out to me by another user. Should be semi'd for a while IMO. - Rjd0060 22:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC) Thanks for pointing it out. I semi'd it. - Philippe | Talk 22:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC) Thanks. I just seemed to be overlooked. I agree with your comment though, there have been quite a few positive edits from IP's but too much vandalism. - Rjd0060 22:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC) Different subject but WP:ANI#Constant violations of WP:NPA. I think you are the one who denied the RFP on this page, but take a look at that report on the Noticeboard if you get a minute. Another one that seems to be getting overlooked. - Rjd0060 02:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC) Sorry, nevermind. Seems user was blocked a bit ago, but the ANI page not noted. - Rjd0060 02:28, 19 October 2007 (UTC) Institute for Higher Education Policy Hello-- You deleted our article on Oct. 5 because of blatant advertising. I was wondering if we could do anything to alter the article to make it not appear that way. If you look on our talk page, the article was deleted before for similar reasons which we cleared up with another admin. Please let us know what we can do. Thanks! (Institute for Higher Education Policy 17:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)) List of United States radio markets A while back you deleted List of United States radio markets, claiming it as "blatant copyright infringement". Please see the deletion discussion about a similar list, List of television stations in North America by media market, where consensus decided that such a list does not infringe on copyright, because it is reporting facts about broadcast markets which are common knowledge in the industry and are widely available to the public. Facts cannot be copyrighted, only the specific expression of those facts, and only when that expression involves a modicum of creativity. See Feist v. Rural. In light of this, would you be willing to restore this page? DHowell 23:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC) Yep, based upon this precedent, I'm willing. I'll do it right now. - Philippe | Talk 03:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC) Thank you! Thanks for taking care of my autoblock. I was going to wait it out when it expired tomorrow but I was getting ancy... Okiefromokla•talk 03:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC) No worries at all. If you continue to have problems with that, send me an email and I'll see what we can do to get it fixed permanently. - Philippe | Talk 03:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC) Thanks again. Okiefromokla•talk 03:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC) RfA Thanks Thanks for your support in my recent RfA. It passed, and I look forward to being of service in any way I can. Hiberniantears 17:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC) Condolences Wait a minute........WHAT HAPPENED??!! You should do this on Wikinews, but, seriously, I offer my condolences to you and your five friends on that subject. -Goodshop 01:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC) I concur. Brightest blessings to you in this troubled time. My deepest condolences to you and your family. Love, Neranei (talk) 01:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC) Really sorry to hear about your loss. My thoughts are with you. Blair - Speak to me 01:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC) Thank you for your kind words. The full story is at [32]. All three kids were in my partner's choir, their mother was a friend, and the pilot was our priest. Rough day in Tulsa. - Philippe | Talk 02:09, 21 October 2007 (UTC) My thoughts are with you and those affected by this tragedy. -- Merope 12:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC) Thank you. The funeral is today, and I'm a worthless mess. - Philippe | Talk 13:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC) How awful... I'll be thinking about you and your partner this week. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC) I reiterate the comments of everybody above. My condolences, and best wishes during this time. Anthøny 17:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC) RfA thank-spam Thank you! Thank you for your help in my RfA. It hammered home a few things I need to keep in mind while admining and passed with a final tally of 40/0/4; two people forgot to vote in time, leaving me short of that exquisite number :-(, but I'll just have to fudge the next vote about me. Adminship feels slightly august but not particularily exalted, so I shall endeavour to consider it a toolkit and make sincere efforts to know what I'm doing before using it. If you later on have something to say or want to ask for -- MESSAGE EATEN BY BEARS --Kizor 14:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 43 22 October 2007 About the Signpost Fundraiser opens, budget released Biographies of living people grow into "status symbol" WikiWorld comic: "George Stroumboulopoulos" News and notes: Wikipedian Robert Braunwart dies WikiProject Report: League of Copyeditors Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315 You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC) User:Carnun I thought you might want to know that the user is continuing his BC-AD/CE-BCE warring. Regards, BorgQueen 14:14, 30 October 2007 (UTC) Barnstar of Good Humor The Barnstar of Good Humor I see that you semi-protected the article Halloween with the reason "Here we go again". This made me smile and laugh. NHRHS2010 talk 23:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC) [33] NHRHS2010 talk 23:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC) Thank you! I've copied it to my userpage. I appreciate your nice words! - Philippe | Talk 01:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 44 29 October 2007 About the Signpost From the editor: Florence Devouard interview Page creation for unregistered users likely to be reenabled WikiWorld comic: "Human billboard" News and notes: Treasurer search, fundraiser, milestones WikiProject Report: Agriculture Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC) Preity Zinta FA Hi there. The Preity Zinta article has recently achieved A-class status. Due to the wealth of support I have decided to now nominate for an FA class article which I believe and judging by the comments of others is pretty much up to. In my view it is better than some existing FA actor articles. I would therefore be very grateful if you could give it a final review in your own time and leave your comments and views at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preity Zinta. Thankyou, your comments are always valuable. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 10:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC) purpose of article protection I nominated the Cuban sandwich article for a lock but it was declined because the issue was deemed a "content dispute". The thing is, the anonymous user with whom I (and others, btw) have a "dispute" is replacing cited facts with uncited misinformation. Say a user from New York was repeatedly editing the Boston Red Sox article to state that Yankees won this year's World Series, for example. Would that be a "content dispute", or a clear case of vandalism? This argument is much the same. There is no evidence to support the anonymous user's edits of entry, yet he/she keeps repeating reintroducing the same blatantly false (and reference-free) story about a Miami origin. If page protection for the article is not a viable option, what course of action would you suggest if this continues? BTW, it may seem silly to argue over a sandwich, but the Cuban/Tampa origin of this lunch staple is universally known and celebrated in the area. In fact, this dispute was (presumably) the inspiration for a newspaper column in the Tampa Tribune. Zeng8r 03:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Page protection is generally reserved for wide scale article vandalism, or vandalism involving multiple editors. When there are disputes between single editors, I usually recommend dispute resolution or - in the case of true vandalism - WP:AIV or WP:ANI. Administrators generally try to stay out of content disputes and encourage users to settle those in other methods. I hope that gives you an understanding of my thinking in this case. In a nutshell, I rarely will protect the page when there's vandalism/disruption by a single editor. If we're talking about GROUPS of editors, I'm more likely to protect. If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask - I truly want you to understand my reasoning - nothing worse than a vague description! - Philippe | Talk 04:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Philippe, there is only one person making the argument (and edits) which supports that the sandwich is from Tampa. He's making the edits under his screen name, and an anonymous IP, there's clearly no consensus on the issue here on Wikipedia. It's a poor analogy to compare a televised winner of a baseball game, and the creator of a particular food dish, ESPECIALLY food and drink origins. The sandwich is much like the margarita, plenty of references from various sources claiming different origins. End of the day, there are conflicting reports of the origin, and its not unreasonable to ask someone to include a mention of this when such references do exist. 68.155.121.7 05:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Anonymous person: Facts are facts. You provide no sources for your edits. The item you keep changing has MULTIPLE good, clear, unambiguous sources, including newspaper articles from Tampa, St. Pete, AND Miami plus two published books. The only source I've found (I've looked) for your Miami assertion are wikipedia mirror sites that cached a version of the Cuban sandwich page before incorrect information could be removed. This is not a disputable issue - the knowledgeable sources are unanimous in agreement. At best, you are removing cited material in favor of incorrect original research, which violates several wikipedia policies. At worst, you are just trying to be a pain in the nether regions, which violates several different wikipedia policies. Why don't you go to the Po-Boy or the Philly Cheesesteak page, remove all references to New Orleans and Philadelphia, and claim they're from Miami. If you're going to try to steal other city's epicurean legacies, might as well go for the gusto... As for "IP edits": 1) This dispute was in the Tampa Tribune. Though wikipedia was not directly mentioned, a few people apparantly figured it out because the article had already been fixed by others when I got to it. 2) Why don't you register? Phillipe: Sorry to clutter up your talk page... Zeng8r 12:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Semi-protection Thank you so much for California Assembly Bills 1792 & 1793. Cheers, Daniel 07:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Great Irish Famine Hi Philippe, I see you protected the above article. Could I draw your attension to this determination from the arbitration. In particular to this statement "When possible, mentors should favor article bans over page protection." Dispite the ongoing carry on, there was some productive work also as seen here. While I can understand you reason for protecting the article, I also find it discouraging. Thanks--Domer48 14:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Thank you for your comment. I am familiar with the arbitration but wish to point out that I am not, as defined in that same arbitration, a mentor. I am an administrator, responding to a request for page protection because of actions that are happening outside of consensus, that is, while consensus is still being determined. I am not going to suggest an article ban in this case. I stand by my decision to protect, but thank you for your comment. It truly is appreciated. The page protection will last only 24 hours, which should give consensus time to formulate. Surely you can use the time on the talk page to discuss future changes? Protection and further work are not mutually exclusive. - Philippe | Talk 16:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Although in case you do want to consider article-based bans, may I recommend a close examination of Domer48's conduct in the article Philippe? He is specifically breaching the arbitration's rulings in a number of ways, most particularly their finding of fact that he is a disruptive editor who posts tendentious and misleading edit summaries. Looking back at the history of it, he appears to run campaigns against editors with whom he disagrees and in this case is (absurdly) trying to take the moral high ground with you in what is cleary a profound disinterest in genuine discussion and consensus-building in the article. LiberalViews 16:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC) I would like you to provide the duff’s to substantiate you accusations, failing that, I would very much appreciate Philippe opening a request for comment on LiberalViews for making scurrilous accusations against me, the reason I’m asking Philippe is because I have never asked for one before, and lack the ability to do so.--Domer48 19:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC) No need as I was just confirming your request for article-level bans and quite rightly suggesting you be first for such consideration. LiberalViews 19:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC) You made accusations, now is your chance to back them up, Philippe could you set up the request for comment for us. I really appreciate it. --Domer48 19:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC) Philippe one other thing if it’s not to much trouble, on the request for page protection, who requested it?--Domer48 21:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC) I believe I did originally at least. It's pretty clear though that it needs protection as long as you are unwilling to genuinely discuss things and just engage in war games. Keep trying - it doesn't seem to be getting you very far! LiberalViews 21:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC) STOP THE MADNESS - I will not - NOT - set up an RFC on anyone on behalf of another user. The instructions for how to do it are on the RFC page. You can check the request for page protection at WP:RFCC. I will NOT be interjected into the madness that surrounds this article, other than simply doing the page protection as requested. - Philippe | Talk 22:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC) No problem, thanks for the advice. --Domer48 22:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC) A page-ban on Domer48 would be very premature. What we may need, ultimately, is a Hkelker 2 style arbitration remedy, in which anyone who spouts a nationalist point of view is topic-banned. It's draconian, but it works. I hope it doesn't come to that. Mackensen (talk) 02:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC) A page ban, would be appropriate if I stray from the criteria outlined in the Arbitration of the Famine. I will support any measures which Mackensen feels appropriate if it stops the breaches of WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA, WP:AGF and WP:NPOV. --Domer48 17:00, 4 November 2007 (UTC) WikiProject Oklahoma Newsletter November 2007 The WikiOkie Reporter WikiProject Oklahoma's Newsletter Issue 3 - November 2007 Edit this newsletter Discuss this newsletter "Your second or third stop for WikiProject Oklahoma News" Sign up to receive this newsletter Oklahoma Portal Current article statistics Past issues Oklahoma to be featured on Main Page The time is here, and we knew it was coming. November 16 is Oklahoma's centennial, and, as expected, WikiProject Oklahoma's newest featured article will appear on the Main Page. Oklahoma will be the first article produced by WikiProject Oklahoma featured on the Main Page since October 23, 2005, when Black Seminoles was featured. Jim Thorpe has also been featured, coming on August 13, 2004. Though featured articles for the main page are always selected by Raul654, Oklahoma's 100th anniversary makes its main page appearance a near sure thing. As of early November 6, Oklahoma had 14 nods of support, with none in opposition. All are welcome and encouraged to help spruce up the article as much as possible for its main page debut, as well as lend a hand in anti-vandalism efforts on November 16th. Wikiproject Oklahoma gets a new Wikipedia ad Thanks to User:Miranda, Wikiproject Oklahoma has joined the ranks of WikiProjects with ads to welcome new editors. On November 5, the ad, in banner form, was completed two days after its request, becoming the 107th Wikipedia ad. The ad, located at Qxz-ad107.gif, can also be seen on WikiProject Oklahoma's project page. Those interested in having the ad on their user pages can add "{{wikipedia ads}}", which displays a random ad picture. An alternative is to simply add the image directly, avoiding unwanted ads. Over 100 articles added to project During the month of October, including Novermber 2, 104 new articles were added to WikiProject Oklahoma. November 2 saw 65 articles added to the wikiproject, all by User:SkiersBot, which adds articles to wikiproject corresponding to tags, such as articles with Oklahoma-related stub tags. This month's task: Anti-vandalism and maintenance efforts for Oklahoma on November 16! The WikiProject Oklahoma newsletter is a work in progress so please share your ideas about how the newsletter can be improved. If you no longer wish to receive this newsletter, please remove your name from the sign-up list. You have received this newsletter because you signed up for it here. If you would like to discontinue receiving this newsletter, please remove your name from the same list. Thanks! Okiefromoklatalk to me 06:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC) Likely the same person You blocked 4.184.255.145 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) back in September for vandalism on the Future Trunks page. The anon has returned with a similar ip, 4.185.156.66 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), and vandalised the Trunks (Dragon Ball) page, and was reverted and warned. Perhaps we should keep an eye on him? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 08:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC) Another RfA Spaming Thank you for constructive criticism in my recent RFA which did not pass at (18/27/10). I will be sure to improve my editing skills and wait until someone nominates me next time. Thank you for you comments! Tiptoety 00:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC) No one expects a Pigman admin! Wallowing in my RfA: This time it's personal... My sincere thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 51 supports, 0 opposes, and 0 neutral. Doubtless it was an error to put one of the government-bred race of pigmen in any position of authority, but I hope your confidence in me proves justified. Even a man pure of heart and who says his prayers at night can become a were-boar when the moon is full and sweet. Fortunately, I'm neither a were-pig nor pure of heart so this doesn't appear to be an imminent danger to Wikipedia for the moment. Fortunate as well because were-pig hooves are hell on keyboards and none too dexterous with computer mice. If ever I should offend, act uncivil, misstep, overstep, annoy, violate policy, or attempt to topple the fascist leadership of Wikipedia, please let me know so I can improve my behaviour and/or my aim. I am not an animal; I am an admin. And, of course, if there is any way in which I can help you on Wikipedia, please do not hesitate to ask me. Despite my japes, I am indeed dedicated to protecting and serving Wikipedia to the best of my foppish and impudent abilities. I will strive to be an admirable admin, shiny and cool, reasonable and beatific. Pigmanwhat?/trail 05:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC) Post Scriptum: I believe my collaged graphic at left, which incorporates the WP globe and mop image, falls under the rubric of parody for my purposes here. Or is it satire? Regardless, it's a legitimate and legally protected First Amendment usage under US law. Complaints and allegations that this is an improper "fair use" image will be entertained on my talk page, probably with fruit juice, finger food and exotic coffees. Avril Lavigne Hi! I'm afraid but I can't see your having protected the article. Or is my pc too slow??? ;-)) --Fromgermany 00:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC) Screwed that one up, didn't I?  :-) It's protected now. - Philippe | Talk 03:02, 9 November 2007 (UTC) Thanks. You're very careful. The vandals on en.wikipedia are much worse and much harder to deal with than on de.wikipedia. But much less yelling, swearing and shouting here. --Fromgermany 03:17, 9 November 2007 (UTC) Really? That's interesting. I would have guessed it was better there. But I'm glad you like it here.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 03:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC) You wouldn't believe how users get on with each other on de.wikipedia. Even a lot of the sysops are at constant fight with each other. And do not ask about the dirty language they use when they want to tell who's master. I've given up de.wikipedia completely because I can no longer stand this awful tone of voice. No need to tell you that among German linguists and sociologists de.wikipedia has an "evil" reputation and I've seen university professors advising their students to stay away from de.wikipedia for research. :-( I want peace and quiet and that's what I find on en.wikipedia, believe me or not. --Fromgermany 11:13, 9 November 2007 (UTC) Some more thankyou spam, glorious spam Thankyou for supporting my successful rfa which closed with 58 supports. If i am honest i am rather humbled by the unanimous support and i hope to live up to everyones expectations. If you ever need any help, don't hesitate to ask. Thanks again. Woodym555 15:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC) Quick Questions on IP vandalism You turned down my request for semi-protection of the solar enregy page due to significant quality contributions from IPs. Fair enough. I think some of these might have been my own unlogged-in edits. Oh well. How much vandalism does a page need to get to warrant semi-protection? The vandalism lately has been rather clever with minor changes to links and pictures that go unnoticed. I'm sure you know it's a lot of work going back through all this over and over again. Do GA articles get any more rights to protection? Mrshaba 16:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC) We protect based on a number of factors (you can read the protection policy at WP:PROTECTION, but generally speaking we try to keep in mind that one of our core values is the idea that we are an encyclopedia that anyone can edit - including folks who aren't logged in. Generally speaking, if there are IP edits that are problems and it's from a couple of individual IPs, it makes sense to warn them, and eventually to report them to WP:AIV. Admins tend to be really reticent to semi-protect a page where anons are making productive edits, because it can be very frustrating for those good users. I absolutely understand your frustration in having to consistently revert an article to remove vandalism. I'll add it to my watchlist as well, and hopefully some other admins that I know watch this page will do the same. If, however, there's an outbreak of vandalism from a wide range of IPS, with multiple occurences per day, then we'd look at page protection. Anything else we prefer to deal with individually. I hope that makes sense - if not, please feel free to ask me to clarify. Thanks for your interest, and your work on the encyclopedia. - Philippe | Talk 19:12, 9 November 2007 (UTC) Persistent vandalism You have issued a "final warning" to User:84.109.51.71. Please note that I have reported this IP previously for abusive sockpuppet vandalism.[34] At the time, Feezo refused to take any action, on the grounds that the IP seemed to have only one abusive edit. [35] The other subsequent edits from this IP seem to be related POV vandalism, and I request that you reconsider. For background, please look at Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Runtshit and the 300 plus abusive sockpuppets established by this vandal. If we can block one of the IPs from which s/he is editing, this will help stem this persistent vandalism. Thanks --RolandR 20:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC) When reporting someone for sockpuppet based vandalism, it's best to assume that the admin handling it knows NOTHING about the sockmaster in question. Most of us know a whole lot about a few of them, and very little about the rest. So, a reports such as yours - no details, no editing comparisons, nothing to help us gauge whether or not the account/IP in question really IS a sock - is likely to not achieve the results that you want. If you can give us something to work with: edit patterns, etc, then we're far more likely to be able to take an appropriate action. I'll look into it farther, but can't at this very moment, as I need to leave for a bit. The other thing you might want to keep in mind is that WP:AIV is for BLATANT vandalism - anything that requires in depth investigation is probably best handled at WP:ANI, but that's just a general rule of thumb. Most of us will, of course, take action on any valid report, wherever it comes in. So, in short - yes, I'll reconsider and look further since you've provided more info for me to go on - but I can't do it immediately. If you need someone more quickly, I'd suggest listing it at WP:ANI. Thanks for following up, and a sincere thanks for your work on the encyclopedia. - Philippe | Talk 20:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC) I'm sorry, but I thought that the Runtshit vandal was so well established that it was unnecessary to give further details. Basically, this is a right-wing Zionist who is stalking me, making edits abusing me personally on articles I have recently edited, and on articles relating to the Middle East (particularly the Israeli left) and on left-wing politics. This character averages at least one attack a day. and to date has made more than 1300 abusive edits on nearly 300 different articles. Dozens of editors and admins have been involved in this so far, and it is hardly necessary to repeat the history each time I make a report. RolandR 21:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC) LGBT WikiProject Newsletter Delivered on 12:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC). My (Remember the dot)'s RfA I never thanked you for participating in my RfA a couple of weeks ago. Thank you for your support, though unfortunately the request was closed as "no consensus". I plan to run again at a later time, and I hope you will support me again then. Thanks again! —Remember the dot (talk) 06:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 45 5 November 2007 About the Signpost Wikimedia avoids liability in French lawsuit WikiWorld comic: "Fall Out Boy" News and notes: Grant money, fundraiser, milestones WikiProject Report: Lists of basic topics Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Volume 3, Issue 46 12 November 2007 About the Signpost Unregistered page creation remains on hold so far WikiWorld comic: "Exploding whale" News and notes: Fundraiser, elections galore, milestones Wikipedia in the News WikiProject Report: Missing encyclopedic articles Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC) Great Neck Village School change to "Village School"? Can the Great Neck Village School be changed to "Village School"? If it's controversial, I can move it back. I wasn't sure. But since you didn't make the change, that is why I am asking. --Ladii artiste (talk) 00:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Hi - I left that one because it made me a little nervous and I wanted an admin w/more naming experience than I to make the call. My gut feeling is that, if anything, "Village School" should probably be a disambig page, but I have nothing - zero - to back that up. Since I didn't know the convention on that one, I decided to leave it, rather than make the wrong call and have to go through the madness of fixing it. So, in short: I don't know if it can be changed, but I'm not comfortable making that particular change myself. I'm sorry, I know that's not a very satisfying (if somewhat vague) answer. - Philippe | Talk 00:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Re: Larry Sanger No problem, I welcome other admins to fix what they think are my mistakes. east.718 at 00:26, November 18, 2007 (sorry to butt in, was tracking what happened with the request). Thanks for the temp semi. It was getting irritating reverting creepy slurs off the page. I do have a question: is there a "bright line" rule for when repeated vandalism warrants a request to protect? I get "it should be more than 5% because that's what every article gets", and "it can be less than 50% because almost no article gets 50%". Is it a simple number? I don't want to waste admin time on requests that won't go anywhere. --- tqbf 01:29, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Hi tqbf - that's a good question. The answer is "not really". I think most admin (myself included) have our own personal standards, but there's nothing really codified, and a lot of it depends on other factors (likelihood of continuance, nature of the attacks, is it BLP, is it a single vandal or set of vandals, etc). There are a few other admins that monitor my talk page and I'd be curious what they use as a "line in the sand", but in my case, for simple vandalism that's ongoing consistently, my general (though not hard and fast) rule is that I like to see several days with multiple (usually 3 or more) vandalisms per day. If it's one day, it better be a pretty intense level of vandalism and from disparate accounts or IPs. Good question, and I'm sorry I couldn't give a more definite answer. - Philippe | Talk 02:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Wokay. That's helpful. I'm not a committed vandalfighter, just fixing stuff where I see it, and I want to make sure I'm not getting in the way of people who are more serious about policing WP. Thanks for the response! --- tqbf 03:18, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Northport Senior High School Would you please explain why you moved this page from its former name before allowing adequate time for discussion? If you take a look at the article's talk page, you will find evidence that the move may be incorrect. Let's see what the Wikipedia community says. Truthanado (talk) 00:31, 18 November 2007 (UTC) I moved it because it was listed as on the requested moves page as uncontroversial, and there was no opposition at the time I looked; there was also supporting documentation listed. Since it's clearly not uncontroversial, I have no objection to it being moved back (or the discussion simply continued, at which time we can re-evaluate). - Philippe | Talk 00:34, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Considering the number of links to Northport High School that now need to go through a redirect, plus the evidence that the name should not have changed, I would like to suggest that the page be moved back to its previous name. What do you think? If you agree, could you please do the move. Or, we can wait a while and see what develops. Your choice. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 02:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC) For me, the deal breaker is the fact that the school's own website doesn't use the word "senior". I've moved it back until discussion has come to consensus. - Philippe | Talk 02:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 47 19 November 2007 About the Signpost An interview with Florence Devouard Author borrows from Wikipedia article without attribution WikiWorld comic: "Raining animals" News and notes: Page patrolling, ArbCom age requirement, milestones Wikipedia in the News WikiProject Report: History Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC) Context?!? An abundance of information does NOT equal "context." This article could have been speedied for any number of criteria. I chose context. It also appears to be linkspam, designed to promote the company linked in the article. It is also not notable. It also appears to be cut and pasted from somewhere else (a clear copyright vio), per the "figure 1" language, when no "figure 1" exists. I can't find the source of the copyright vio right now, or I'd tag it again. Please reexamine this, after fully reading this "article." Mr Which??? 04:45, 21 November 2007 (UTC) My apologies. The article that I'm referring to is the mess that is Preselector. Mr Which??? 04:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC) I've re-read the article, and I stand by my original decision, though invite you to take it to AfD. By "Figure 1", I believe they mean the link - which is, of course, labeled [1]. I don't think it's link-spam based on a single link. I'm sorry that we disagree on this one. - Philippe | Talk 05:02, 21 November 2007 (UTC) I have neither the time, nor the inclination to go through the pain that is AfD. I have only tagged those articles that I view as uncontroversial speedies. That you somehow read that article and found both notability and context (again, abundance of info doesn't equal "context") is disconcerting to me. I simply don't understand how you can hold that view on the mess that is that article. Where's the notability? How has the author put it in anything like a relevant context to non-technicians in the field? Mr Which??? 05:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC) I think you'll notice that the article has already had one user work on cleanup. We don't require notability for everything: remember, notability applies to companies, people, bands, etc - not necessarily to terms, industries, or equipment that is trade-specific. I'm sorry, I simply don't believe this qualifies for speedy deletion. Whether it would survive AfD is another matter, but it doesn't qualify on any of our speedy deletion reasons, at least in my reading. I think if you review my work you'll see that I tend to be one of the most aggressive deletionists we have, and I don't see it here, I'm sorry. - Philippe | Talk 05:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC) Yeah, I've removed the link and the last couple of paragraphs - I agree they were both unneeded and self-promoting (I've put a note about this on the authors talk page). However, I believe that the article should remain (I might put some work into it, or at least clean it up a bit more) as it does seem to be a useful part of a RF communication system. Blair - Speak to me 05:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC) I agree with your changes, Blair. Thanks for your work. - Philippe | Talk 05:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC) (ecx2)Your record is exactly why I was stunned that you somehow found that this article had established a context relevant to non-technicians. Oh well. Live and learn, I guess. Regards, Mr Which??? 05:17, 21 November 2007 (UTC) I'm curious about why you think things in the encyclopedia should only be relevant to non-technicians? We have a number of highly technical articles here - I can't make head or tails of most of the virus or biology ones, for instance... this may be the root of the question, actually. - Philippe | Talk 05:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC) I was under the impression (I don't have the policy right at my fingertips) that there was some policy regarding context relevant to non-technicians. Perhaps I was mistaken. As for my edits to that article, if we're keeping the thing (against what I think should happen, of course), it might as well look decent. :) Mr Which??? 05:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC) New Navy et al Hello. Last night new editor Whitechedda (talk · contribs) went on a spree creating unreferenced articles on non-notable in-universe organizations from the science fiction role-playing game Rifts. According to the logs, you zapped New Navy straight away, however two still remain: Pecos Empire and Republic of Japan (Rifts role-playing game). How should we handle these two? Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 15:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC) I got 'em both.  :-) Thanks for pointing them out. - Philippe | Talk 04:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC) Thank you, sir, for your swift removal of this fancruft! --Kralizec! (talk) 19:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC) Your opinion on a bold reversion I copied this from a message I left for GRBerry, because I also respect your opinion, and also because GRB seems to have gone offline, and I'd like a quick opinion on my actions here. In my opinion, CitiCat prematurely closed discussion on the AfD for Bruce Khlebnikov, and I boldly reverted the close almost immediately. As I respect your opinion, I wanted your take on if I should have applied WP:IAR in this case. I fully understand that the IAR policy is not meant to create anarchy, but to improve the project, and my question for you is: in your opinion, did my bold move in this case, accomplish what the spirit of IAR actually is? Thanks, Mr Which??? 04:58, 22 November 2007 (UTC) I support your action, and will happily go on record saying such. - Philippe | Talk 05:13, 22 November 2007 (UTC) Thanks. It was my first really bold action, since ... well ... without giving too much away, let's just say I'm not an inexperienced editor. I have many more edits behind me than my visible count would seem to imply. Anyways, I'm just trying to get my sea-legs under me at AfD, RC, and Dead-end/Orphan, so any input you have for me would be nice. Regards, Mr Which??? 05:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC) RfA thanks Just wanted to say thanks for supporting me! Please find your thank you card here, should you wish to see it. I'm honored to have received your support. Here's hoping civility wins out everywhere ;) All the best, ~Eliz81(C) 21:40, 24 November 2007 (UTC) Footed Pajamas Hi Philippe. You rescently deleted an article "Footed Pajamas" with reason statiting that it was "blatant" advertising. That is not the case. Nor was any bot-software used to publish it. The article is almost identical to the one for Dr. Denton or Carter's, Inc. which is another "brand" of sleeper pajamas. I would appreciate your suggestions or input on this. Sincerely, T. At The Throne of Judgment page move I'm just curious as to why you moved At The Throne of Judgment to At the Throne of Judgment. The band name has the "The" capitalized, and it is how they themselves spell it. I'm going to move it back to the original again. --BoaDrummer 04:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC) I'll respond to this on your talk as well. I moved it because my understanding of [[WP:NAME] is that we frankly don't care how they spell it themselves. For instance, k.d.lang would be capitalized (to K.D. Lang), based on our manual of style. The same is true here. We meet our consistency rules, not their trademark desires. I will not move it back immediately, to give you time to find me another reference that demonstrates that I'm incorrect - which is always possible - and if so we can rediscuss. Otherwise, I'm moving it back. - Philippe | Talk 15:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC) Proposed article deletion and cleanup I have been helping a new user Aaleksanyants who created some articles and then changed the articles' names by creating new articles. He would now like to delete the old versions of the articles, I think. Below is what he put on my talk page. I suggested he ask for help at the Wikipedia:Help desk. Since I'm not an admin, I'm not sure how to further help. Could you help this user please? Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 03:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Following is text that the user added to my talk page: Hi again and thank you for adding categories to my previously submitted articles. One more question: how do I delete articles after changing all the links to take to new location? Initially the article was called "Po sledam Briminskih Muzykantof" that was not correct and I have corrected its name according to IMDB item, see http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0251333/ , also I have changed all the links in other articles to take to new location, therefore the old page is no longer required and should be deleted. Thank you in advance, Aaleksanyants (talk) 19:35, 24 November 2007 (UTC) Hi again, Here is what I found regarding article deletion on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_policy : Deletion of a Wikipedia article removes the current version and all previous versions from view. Unlike page blanking, which can be performed (or reverted) by any user, deletion can be performed only by administrators. Administrators can also view deleted pages and reverse ("undelete") any deletion. So, as long as I am not an administrator, I cannot delete those typo named pages that are not linked from anywhere else! Therefore i have to ask for deletion someone esle, e.g. YOU :-) So please, delete the following pages as they are not linked from anywhere: Po sledam Briminskih Muzykantof and Po sledam bremenskih muzykantov, as the right syntax should be Po sledam bremenskikh muzykantov as given in IMDB. Regards Aaleksanyants (talk) 20:24, 25 November 2007 (UTC) Responded to both users on their talk.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 04:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 48 26 November 2007 About the Signpost Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles WikiWorld comic: "Cursive" News and notes: Ombudsman commission, fundraiser, milestones Wikipedia in the News WikiProject Report: Education in Australia Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)