User talk:Ricky81682/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

Oklahoma Supreme Court Photo

I support your recent tagging of Image:Oklahoma Supreme Court-2006.jpg for speedy deletion for two reasons, (1) As you pointed out, the photo is apparently non-compliant with applicable Wikipedia policies and guidelines, (2) It is not an up-to-date photo of the "current" Oklahoma Supreme Court Justices, since at least of them depicted in the photo, Robert E. Lavender has since retired from the Court. --TommyBoy (talk) 09:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Image of Navistar MaxxPro MRAP up for deletion

Image:MRAP_Cat_1_navistar.jpg Although the above image is named as the Category 1 MRAP it is actually a rare photograph of the Category 2 MaxxPro MRAP (identifiable by it's third set of rear side glass - the much more common cat1 vehicle has just two). I believe that this image has value as a non-replaceable image as a means of differentiating between the category 1 and category 2 MaxxPro MRAPs. Please don't delete it. Dino246 (talk) 11:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

William Weightman Photos

Hello. I see that you have noticed the mutliple William Weightman photos. I had a computer error and could not upload the photos correctly, causing this mishap. However, the photo Image:William Weightman (manufacturer).jpg is the one that I feel is the best of the group and should be left there while the other should be deleted. The computer problem should not send any viruses, so there is no need to panic. Thank you for notifying on this. Jughead.z(1) (talk) 00:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Inflammatory

Hi, Ricky.
In the meantime, the case is closed, but still, I'm asking you to abstain in future from giving the statements like you gave on the WP:ANI [1] "My favorite is always when I end up having to block the original poster because they were the one initiating things".
You're an admin, you should stay neutral.
But with such statement (that looks more like chat on forums), it looked like you're suggesting that me (the one who reported the case) was the one that messed up. It looked like, "here's a bunch of us, let's bully this one".
You're an admin, don't allow such things to yourself. Don't allow others to pull you into something. Please, stay focused.
I remind you, it wasn't me who started sending messages around (related to Kosovo's independence) and taunting others with that. To remind you, he posted that on his userpage, then in the comment of edit on article Italia irredenta, and on my talkpage. I've never did such things (I'm not mocking to Serbs because of it, and I've never taunted anyone. Neither on my userpage, neither on other's talkpages).
You've never been involved (I've never seen you) in this particular matter, so it's not fair from you to judge "who initiated what".
At last, user Cherso crossed the line there. And it's so sad that he got away without a single warning like "Hey! You can't do that.". To make things worse, as I see, no admin told anything to Cherso because of it.
Looking forward for better mutual understanding, sincerely, Kubura (talk) 09:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Ricky. Thanks for your response.
I understand you. Fatigue is terrible thing, and many trolls/provokers are masters in "marketing and presentations" and hiding of their true nature. After the hours of battles with IP-vandals (and they are persistent, so the fight usually goes for days, weeks, months), it's hard for anyone (especially for admins, that have to stay calm on everything) to see clearly who is what.
Have a nice day, Kubura (talk) 09:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Non-free image removal

Fair enough.

I'll be more careful when finding images for things like that from now on.
What will the image page say on the portion where it indicates the legal/illegal use status (i.e., whether or not it's copyrighted) if it's safe to use on my userpage? That kind of always confused me a bit.
Just so I know for the future.

Anyway, thanks much,
— TIMALDERSON | TALK | CONTRIBS —Preceding comment was added at 14:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Your Inquiry About My Posting of Images, From Cooman456 I just got them from the internet, but I'd imagine most are a free liscence. I don't really know how to leave comments, so maybe this is how to do it. But I want to make Wikipedia much more visual, and I feel it's important to do that, for the pictures on Wikipedia are lacking. Isn't most stuff on the internet free liscencing? Why do you have to break my balls when I'm trying to make Wikipedia a better place? I understand you're trying to make sure everything's legal, but please, let me keep my pictures up so Wikipedia can be better. This site needs to be more visual. I thank you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooman456 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

And I have another question. Can you please tell whoever makes the page for the 1964, '68, '56, '52, and other presidential elections of the 20th century to stop putting people who didn't run on the candidates page? I'm tired of deleting these non-candidates. For example, Kennedy never ran for president in 1956. I thought he didn't, and I double checked, and he didn't. This is very sloppy on whatever person made this page. In the candidates gallery there are TONS and TONS of people who actually never ran, and this is not good for people who want to learn about the election. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooman456 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas

Thanks! for submitting the false positive report for my edition in the article. I am really busy, and hardly log on to Wikipedia, so I haven't seen it until now. Inigo75 10:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

What are archives

What are archives cause i have know idea what they are well i do but well what are they for cause i have no idea what there for so reply.--~~~~--Be polite Be nice Be full of love (talk) 01

12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Your actions on Cemal Gursel article

Hi. I actually need your help for those Cemal Gursel related images' clarifications at the discussion board (/* WP:PUI */ )because I frankly did not see the problem. Because I am not well versed with Wikipedia and your concerns I am sure are very to the point, I just need your pointing out what exactly is the concern for those 3 images that appears to be in public domain freely. Thanks fo ryour consideration and guiding on this which I believe has been very useful to the article's quality as well. Could you let me know here or your talk page or the article discussion page? Leblebi (talk) 13:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Addendum: The following two images were processed by that administrator Ricky81682 with no appropriate license assurances and the questioning tags were vandalized by him while he abuses other article images with fictitious concerns and failing to rectify his mistakes despite good faith discussion attempts. More interestingly, he adds fictitous licenses at images put in wiki by other users in those specific images. Than he goes and removes PUI tags while he puts same tags in other’s work to damage. See below:

Image:Image-TJC Logo.jpg • (cur) (last) 01:43, 19 February 2008 Ricky81682 (Talk | contribs) m (757 bytes) (Reverted edits by 71.184.9.231 (talk) to last version by Ricky81682) (undo) • (cur) (last) 01:32, 19 February 2008 71.184.9.231 (Talk) (1,134 bytes) (undo) • (cur) (last) 01:31, 19 February 2008 Ricky81682 (Talk | contribs) (757 bytes) (license) (undo)

India Sex.jpg 01:30, 19 February 2008 (hist) (diff) Image:India Sex.jpg • (cur) (last) 01:40, 19 February 2008 Ricky81682 (Talk | contribs) m (390 bytes) (Reverted edits by 71.184.9.231 (talk) to last version by Ricky81682) (undo) • (cur) (last) 01:30, 19 February 2008 71.184.9.231 (Talk) (768 bytes) (undo) • (cur) (last) 01:22, 19 February 2008 Ricky81682 (Talk | contribs) (390 bytes) (added license) (undo)

The same administrator Ricky81682 covered up the following vandalized sound file despite appropriate copyright tags at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CemalGursel1963.ogg. 14:15, 16 February 2008 Rettetast (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:CemalGursel1963.ogg" ‎ (Speedy deleted per (CSD G12), was a blatant copyright infringement. using TW) 14:15, 16 February 2008 (hist) (diff) Cemal Gürsel‎ (Removing instance of image CemalGursel1963.ogg that has been speedily deleted per (CSD G12); using TW) He erased all goodfaith discussion attempts at the above sound page including all of its log files to prevent traceability and responsibility.

He also continuously interferes in bad-faith with an obtrusive and predatory manner with the following files:

Image:ArmyGames.jpg clearly indicated “From his family album and personal collection” and it is also a government photo declared heritage. There should be no problem there. Making fair use claims does not negate against public domain. It seems extra but does not make abuse by an administrator OK.

Image:WithACadet.jpg indicates the same “From his family album and personal collection” as to the ownership of the copyright and further fair use statements are provided, which do not again negate against the image legitimacy.

Perhaps the absurdity of the abusive admin interaction becomes most obvious at the Image:Harb&istiklalmedal.JPG and all of its history with appropriate tags.

Please stop this nonsense. Discuss it at WP:PUI. The same problem goes for most of the images on the article, and these were not the first to be nominated for deletion.

Ricky. The above was also posted at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Regarding_Ricky81682_and_question_of_possible_administrator_abuse_over_files

Rettetast (talk) 00:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed your shitty nonsense you gave at Cemal Gursel images. It appears that you are an asswipe. Your masturbative conduct belongs to your bathroom or the stable you grew up, not wikipedia. 72.74.116.197 (talk)! —Preceding comment was added at 23:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Please unarchive Kevin Macdonald

A user's behavior is the subject of a Wikiqutte board complaint here as well as discussion on AN/I. thanks! Boodlesthecat (talk) 04:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Thre is no consensus on AN/I, just a unilateral declaration by one admin who responded with an obnoxious ? "shut the hell up" The rest of the discussion is by the anti-Semitic editor himself. Explain "consensus" there? I would appreciate it if you would clarify there is no consensus, a false claim which is unfairly biasing my Wikiquette board complaint. Boodlesthecat (talk) 04:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Why are you and others covering up for flagrant violations of Wikipedia policy and a vicious anti-Semite? And threatening to block me for complaining about vicious, anti-semitic attacks against me? And making false claims of "consensus?" I don;t get it. Explain please. Boodlesthecat (talk) 04:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Mr. Pelican Shit

I have nominated Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Mr. Pelican Shit (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. *** Crotalus *** 12:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:4-Zone albums

I have nominated Category:4-Zone albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 03:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, VartanM failed to tell me about it and didn't even discuss it with me, even though I tried to discuss things with him on his talk page. He seems to have an intent to exterminate me from wikipedia, but I'll WP:AFG and hope he's just trying to be an upstanding wikipedian. Thanks again for the warning, I replied to defend myself, but I think I wrote a little too much, so I apologize for that (tried to bold so I won't waste your time). — ^talk § _Arsenic99_ 20:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

clark.jpg

Obviously it's supposed to be the original upload, as looking at the Percy Clark article would have suggested! Thanks for pointing it out to me. Andrew nixon (talk) 07:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Colleen

Thanks. FYI: [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slrubenstein (talk • contribs) 11:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I have found no pattern at all in what articles she choses to (silly) edit - if you look at her contributions, you will see a wide range, and she seldome makes more than one edit to any given article. If she reverts to her childish behavior, through a sock or another IP, the only way to know it is her is that the edit consists on one inane and unsourced statement. Hard to track down. Slrubenstein | Talk 15:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, it's me, Colleenthegreat. I do have the ability to renew my IP address, but promise that I do not intend to use this right now (aside from this comment). I have not yet created an alternate account, or done editing on another IP address (besides this comment), and am willing to wait before doing anything. I've written a long comment on my talk page explaining why I said what I did about bypassing the block. Please note that I did not intend to create a sockpuppet to use alongside other accounts, but merely to create another account alltogether and not again use User:Colleenthegreat. Creating another account appeared to be the only option I had, as I have had a long and hard learning process in understanding policy and after I made one questionable proposal to talk:jesus, slrubenstein took at look at my contributions (and my learning process) and assumed bad faith, prompting him to block me for a month without warning and after he had jumped to conclusions without doing much research into my actions. I just don't want this to happen again, so I think it's better to evoke my right to dissapear and create a new account so that others will not be able to use my good-faith contributions (and learning curve) against me in the future.

You can try to read the very long comment on my talk page where I pointed out why I believe I have been treated without WP:AGF, and you will see the reasoning why I chose to post a comment saying that I do not feel I should respect the block. It is obvious that I had no true ability to contest the block or defend myself, despite apologizing, explaining my handicaps, and expressing that I now understand our policies; it seems no matter what I said, slrubenstein's assumptions would take precedence, and I have already contested the block twice without much creedence given to me. Again, I don't intend to create sockpuppets, just a new account; But I have not done so and am considering not doing it if there is a chance that I can be treated fairly. I have explained about and apologized for all of slrubenstien's accusations (see User talk:Colleenthegreat), so if that could be mentioned on the noticeboard, it would be appreciated. Again, I do not intend to bypass the block by editing with an IP address (or alternate account) again unless I am still treated unfairly and not given a true chance to contest my block. Sorry for making this comment. 71.153.182.56 (talk) 19:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Ricky, it is clear to me that English either IS her native language (in which case she lied) or that she is so fluent in it that it cannot be used to explain why she changed heroine, with a link to her, to heroin, with a link to the drug (in which case she is disingenuous and manipulative). So no, I do not trust her; the more eloquent she defends herself the more evidence I see that she either lied or is manipulative. Please take this seriously, at least, keep it in mind.

So I do not trust her. But I trust you. I have no objection to your unblocking her on two conditions: that you agree to mentor her, and that as part of this you check her contributions every few days, or at least weekly. My main concern is the seemingly random but numerous number of edits that are minimally, silly, and verge either on a violation of WP:NOR or vandalism. She was warned 9 times to cease silly edits. Eloquent pleading and an apology the one time she was actually blocked do not convince me. But if you will monitor her edits for the next month or so well, I have to respect and honor your good faith and willingness to mentor, so if that is the case, I will not object to your unblocking her. Are you willing to take on this role? Slrubenstein | Talk 12:26, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposal RE: User:Mikkalai's vow of silence

You are a previous participant in the discussion at WP:AN/I about User:Mikkalai's vow of silence. This is to inform you, that I have made a proposal for resolution for the issue. I am informing all of the users who participated, so this is not an attempt to WP:CANVAS support for any particular position.

The proposal can be found at: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed resolution (Mikkalai vow of silence) Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 02:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

My bad

That was really my bad, I thought it was cause it had the same names in end. NimiTize 18:56, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Confused

Can you tell me why you altered my copy-in to a hidden window in this diff? It seems to me it makes it harder for me to get a response regarding the sockpuppetry and the broken WP:SSP creation link that way.

Thanks, M1rth (talk) 20:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD: Nominated for deletion; List of victims of the Babi Yar massacre

I've nominated this article for deletion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 March 1#List of victims of the Babi Yar massacre as a POV fork. Jd2718 (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Help to calm down Balkan nationalism

In many articles about Dalmatia a group of fanatic Croats (user:Kubura, user:Zenanarh, etc..) is back with the usual Balkan fanatism like in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dalmatia. They use the stick and the carrot when needed, as their boss Kubura does. I have sent them messages about "Let's do Wikilove" in the hope that they could calm down and cooperate with Italian wikiusers (like user:Cherso, user:Pannonicus, user:PIO, user:Mariokempes and others) but nothing has changed. May be you can help to calm down this Balkan nationalism (that user:Dewrad has defined insane)? Thanks.--Marygiove (talk) 02:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Help needed at CAIR article with unfair editing

Ricky, you tried to mediate some previous recent "edit disputes" at Council on American-Islamic Relations, and now User Mirth is preventing basic NPOV edits that provide balance. Please look into this as soon as possible. Thank you. Kahmed (talk) 22:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

ANI thread

Can you come back to here if you have the time or interest please. I need to get some more views on what I think continues to be a complex case of conflict of interest by this editor - and whether this should just got to the Wikipedia Foundation now rather than us trying to deliberate it further. Thank you.--VS ^talk 10:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use

Hi Ricky. Please do not add text ssush as "no suitable explaanation or rationale" for fair use. I specify the image is a book cover and is permited under Wikipedia guidelines (unless it has changed recently). Thanks. Dananderson (talk) 17:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit-warring continues at CAIR with ignoring of multiple warnings

Ricky, you recently again had to intervene at the article on Council on American-Islamic Relations to set the record straight. Now, User:ForeverFreeSpeech has disrupted the article again by reversing your edits. Secondly, User:Mirth is challenging your edits on Discussion page. As you are an administrator, I request that you deal with ForeverFreeSpeech and futher resolve this unfair attempt to prevent NPOV balance for the CAIR article. The allegations are serious in the article, and the other viewpoint needs to be included to provide NPOV and balance. I request your intervention as soon as possible. Thank you. Kahmed (talk) 22:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Botanist articles

Ricky, I was wondering if you might intervene again with Rotational (talk · contribs). He still continues his edit warring and attack on the botanist template. Removing the template is entirely disruptive and pointy in my opinion (see diff). I don't want to continue an edit war; this user refuses to take the advice of several editors at AN/I. Any help would be appreciated, even if it's just watching his contributions. Cheers, Rkitko ^(talk) 15:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Homestar1936 is requesting an unblock

Since you blocked, I thought I would seek your input. [3] He seems contrite, if a bit snide, and promises to be reformed. What say you? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Its been about 24 hours, and I haven't heard from you. I unblocked the user. They have been warned that ANY more problems will result in a return of the indef block again. If this is a problem, please let me know. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

You haven't lost your mind. I have. Never mind me, I'm an idiot. Carry on! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Request

Hello, I randomly stumbled across your name and since you seem helpful, could you please undelete this image (Image:Nintendo.svg), I would like to provide the fair use rationale. Thanks! -- penubag  (talk) 04:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! :) -- penubag  (talk) 15:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Whispered.jpg (from Full Metal Panic!) image deletion

Hello, I'm the user who wrote the article and posted the picture. The picture is a scan of a poster that came in a FMP guidebook (it was a pullout) as well as being available free-standing. I hope that qualifies it under the fair use guidelines. I'm afraid I'm a recent user and this is my first time uploading an image -- I tried to correct the info. on the image editing page, per your request, but I seem to have messed it up somehow. I am still very awkward using features of Wikipedia, and have mostly been copying other users' edits from pages for formatting and then adding my information. Can you help me clean up the page so the picture isn't deleted; it really helps the casual reader because it contains visual representations for characters who have not appeared in animated form yet. Thank you.

User RoyalxOptimum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RoyalxOptimum (talk • contribs) 15:37, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

wired cover image

The wired cover image ( Image:WiredCovers.png ) was uploaded under fair use rationale that these were small thumbnails meant for critical commentary and no suitable free image existed. I uploaded them before the new image policies/tags so I don't know which tag to use to describe the rationale. Please let me know. Alex 13:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

incivility?

i don't know if this is the right place to discuss this, but you left me a message and this is my response:

first of all, i would like to know what it was in my exchange with 'cornus' or whatever that you consider uncivil.

here is everything i said to him since he began destroying the Fleshcrawl page:

Please stop changing things without discussing it here first. I spent alot of time and effort making it the way it is; it's perfect, please don't change it. AeturnalNarcosis (talk) 03:18, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I do believe i never said i "owned it" ... i do believe, in fact, you're trying to, as they say, 'put words in my mouth.' ...and as for the fair use, give me some time, i'm working on them. AeturnalNarcosis (talk) 03:33, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Now you lost me. AeturnalNarcosis (talk) 03:33, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

(he claimed i was calling names).

Jesus, how simple are you? that section of the article IS about their albums. AeturnalNarcosis (talk) 03:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't see anything that says anything about that. and i have fixed each image.... read the source for the "non-free rationale box" on each of the covers' image pages... i have included their main entry as articles that contain the images.

Now, if you like, i can contact the band (i am in e-mail contact with 2 of their members, Bastian Herzog and Oli Grbvac, on an infrequent basis) and see what they think about me using their album covers to illustrate the chronology of their recordings in a more elaborate, well-fashioned method than text. by the way, they sent me the digipack of their latest release for my good work and effort on their wikipedia page

.

on an unrelated topic... have you ever even listened to this band, or do you just randomly ruin great wikipedia articles for the sadistic pleasure that comes from destroying another man's work? AeturnalNarcosis (talk) 01:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

what is "uncivil" about that?

secondly (and this is unrelated to the message you left me, but you seem like the appropriate person to ask, as it appears to me that you're 1) attributed with more priveleges than myself and 2) attempting to itervene in this mess), could you please point me to the page where it says that an album image can only be used on the entry page for that specific album?

and thirdly, is there any possible way you can make cornus stop vandalising the fleshcrawl page? I was in the process of making their page better than just a 'start-class' page... i would like to see it at least a B-class page. i have spent alot of time and effort on it, including the hour or so i spent to make the chronology of their releases (of which the album cover images are an intergral part because they shows the progression of their artwork, which is highly related to the music and lyrics of each respective album).

thank you,

AeturnalNarcosis (talk) 21:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

---

my response:

i don't see how it is uncivil to ask such a question. it is a legitimate question: from where i'm standing, it appears that this user is randomly selecting wikipedia articles and destroying them... i say randomly because Fleshcrawl is a relatively unheard-of band, even within the death metal community, and i say destroying because he has added no constructive input, but rather has actively removed important parts.

maybe... just maybe... and i might be wrong about this... but maybe the other editor is in fact a craven milksop who cannot handle direct, focused criticism. i suppose it takes a vertebrate to handle criticism... just imagine if i was actually uncivil with him, as i were with Leon Sword (whom i straight-forward called a twat, and whom i commend for his patience and understanding)... if that were the case, there wouldn't be enough milk in wisconsin to console that temper tantrum.

just my thoughts

also, i'm going to let this one go for now... it's no big deal, just a minor annoyance (i.e., it's not uncivil to be critical). i'll find a way around his blatant arrogance and destructive ignorance.

thank you for your time, and i apologise for using so much of it / taking part in this whole mess.

AeturnalNarcosis (talk) 21:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply to post on Fleshcrawl talk page

is it even possible to get a policy (i.e., would it be possible to get them to change their policy concerning the use of album cover art in discography pages)?

AeturnalNarcosis (talk) 08:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

ANI Notice

Thanks for informing Triippe about the ANI discussion. I was going to post something about it but I got side-tracked with some "real world" distractions before I got to it. Much appreciated.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 08:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup

Thanks for cleaning up the article. Squash Racket (talk) 06:26, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Something to think about

This is related to the article Hedvig Malina:
As for the accusations against me: The difference between my reverts and the two editors' is that they are two and I am only one, so it gives the initial impression that they are correct and I try to vandalize the article only because of the 3RR policy. If the numbers were the other way around, they would be the ones under the threat of 3RR. Reality and facts wouldn't change, only the numbers in the equation.
Once you have this advantage, you can easily make it seem like you are being fair and all. This is a very basic and easy trick to pull out on Wikipedia. For the rest, see my talk.--Svetovid (talk) 11:45, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

He continued his accusations on his talk page (being disrespectful to you too), although an administrator already clarified this for him while declining his unblock request. Basically he repeatedly mixed some copyediting with deletion of relevant information and reliable references, messing up the structure of the article etc. After a time we got tired of analyzing his edits, and sometimes simply reverted his edit asking him to be constructive. You can see in the page history that for a long time I tried to keep his constructive edits, it's just tiring to always clean up after him in the long run. Squash Racket (talk) 12:26, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

And I've just seen this one:

Yes, these nationalists are ridiculous. They polarize every issue, attack everybody and then play the victims. It's easy to spot if you are neutral and intellectually honest though.--Svetovid (talk) 11:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

He simply doesn't want to stop. Squash Racket (talk) 12:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

"we got tired" --> You and Hobartimus.
Editors that reverted your edits but left the article because you reverted everybody: 147.175.98.213, Tankred, 78.98.139.19. That's 4 editors with me. Suddenly, it's 2 against 4.
"deletion of relevant information" - I asked 3 times to list those relevant information that was removed. Not once did you answer.
As for that quote: What does my opinion on fanatical nationalists have to do with the article? It is just another red herring - "informal fallacy of presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but doesn't address the issue in question."
Ricky81682, sorry about the off topic comment, but I need to defend myself.--Svetovid (talk) 15:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Answering Svetovid's really off topic comment:

• Tankred has two edits in the article, a number of different IPs edited the article, 147.175.98.213 seems to have left Wikipedia altogether[4]. This is the other IP you mentioned?
• If you want to delete reliable sources, it is polite that you give reasons for it, as I asked you a number of times. Or I should?
• For this one no need for any answer, you received your final warning...

Sorry for this comment, but there were too many false statements. Squash Racket (talk) 16:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Which statement was false? Name it and say why it was false.
Not to clutter this talk page, it continues here.--Svetovid (talk) 17:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Following on your comments

"Take this as a final warning; do not attack an editor like that again or you will be blocked."
"And again, do not attack other editors, no matter what."
Does the same apply to Squash Racket's calling me a disruptive editor[5]?--Svetovid (talk) 19:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we should only post here, if Ricky 81682 doesn't mind, don't you think?

You called others vandals with absolutely no reason numerous times despite several warnings, please don't try to mislead an administrator and make false comparisons.

I'm deeply sorry because that message and your overall behavior made me a bit upset, Svetovid. Next time I will write "degrading message containing several personal attacks removed" or "unnecessary message removed" or something like that in the edit summary. Although as the link you provided shows that didn't stop you from copy&pasting a part of the above section (missing your first comment) on my talk page, instead of yours.

I would also ask you to please try to handle my talk page with a bit of respect (number of false warnings in the past etc.) or don't post there unless it's really unavoidable. Squash Racket (talk) 05:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I called your edits vandalism, not you. You attacked me directly, so it's a false comparison because your attack was more personal.
That advice was based on evidence everybody can check.
Anyway, this was a question to Ricky and I would like to see an answer.--Svetovid (talk) 10:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

This edit summary here after you posted this message? Please.
You need your more personal insults? Just a few: ridiculous nationalists, POV nationalist, hijacker, biased, hijacker, owner,debate muddling with fallacies exposed, etc. Everybody can check the evidence. The problem is you kept doing this even after a clear warning from an administrator. Squash Racket (talk) 10:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, nationalists are ridiculous to me.
Some of the fallacies were already listed and nobody challenged the description so far.
disruptive user who ... Why are you trying to use something you are guilty of too?
Anyway, we are cluttering someone else's talk page but there is no other way, because I have to defend myself and Racket doesn't allow discussion on his talk page and doesn't participate on mine.--Svetovid (talk) 11:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you right now verify your personal attacks? I said I was deeply sorry. This very recent edit summary here about an hour ago? After recent warnings from an administrator? You can answer on your own talk page, so we won't use Ricky's page anymore. Squash Racket (talk) 11:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

You only wrote an apology after you were reported. You used the same kind language repeatedly so you deserve the same kind of warning I received.--Svetovid (talk) 13:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think so. You can't even stop right now. You use the same uncivil edit summaries that before. And you never apologised. Squash Racket (talk) 13:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your note

I don't know where to post exactly, but since you left me a note I feel I should comment on this. Feel free to move or remove this post, if issues with the article are considered resolved.

User Svetovid nominated the article for deletion ([6]) in early January. During the deletion debate his tone was characterized as somewhat aggressive aldready by uninvolved editors. After the discussion ended with 8 keep votes and he turned to edit warring and started to rename the article not in the title(which requires a "Request for move" process) but within the article body making a number of other changes, deletions as well constantly reverting to his version without limitation. After his disruption he was blocked for "edit warring at Hedvig Malina" diff on 20:20, 6 February for 12 hours. The same day the block expired, he continued ([7]) the same revert on the same article he was blocked for while using a script Wp:Twinkle (not to be used in edit warring and disruption) and marking the edit as "minor" which hides the disruption from RC patrol and other watchlists where minor edits are hidden. Even though his immidiate continuation of the same acts he was only blocked on 13:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[8] After this he waited less than two days to continue the same revert on the same article he was twice blocked for [9] which includes deleting several sources at the same time while putting up a refimprove tag (?!), the same renaming without request for move process. He continues the very same acts to this day, making the same revert to his version, [10], deleting 8 reliable sources while putting up "we need more refs tag", marking the edit as minor (that's some minor edit deleting 2500 bytes worth of content among other things), to hide from the eyes of uninvolved editors, this time also marking his own disruptive reverts as "vandalism revert" abusing Twinkle in the process. He very often writes deceptive edit summaries or employs other tactics like marking as minor or marking as vandalism rv, to "fly under the radar" of usual patrol. He makes several personal attacks along the lines of false accusations of vandalism to attempt to deceive or confuse uninvolved editors or patrollers. He slowed down the pace of reverts but judging from the time pattern seems determined to continue his months long tactic relating to this article indefinetly. Hobartimus (talk) 03:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Ricky, you noticed the sections above this one? Squash Racket (talk) 07:57, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

As for the accusations against me: The difference between my reverts and the two editors' is that they are two and I am only one, so it gives the initial impression that they are correct and I try to vandalize the article only because of the 3RR policy. If the numbers were the other way around, they would be the ones under the threat of 3RR. Reality and facts wouldn't change, only the numbers in the equation.

Once you have this advantage, you can easily make it seem like you are being fair and all. This is a very basic and easy trick to pull out on Wikipedia. For the rest, see my talk.--Svetovid (talk) 10:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Svetovid's concerns

He asked me to comment on his page, I did:

Repeat myself again: if you want to remove reliable sources, you have the reasons for this too. You understand? Why do you want to remove these sources? How should I know what motivates your deletions?

Why do you think the blog is reliable? Blogs are basically personal diaries containing opinions, right?
One more tiny request: would you give an url for the Czech News Agency reference or if it's from printed media, format it as a citation? I've asked you numerous times, the other sources are formatted (if I remember well, all of them). Squash Racket (talk) 11:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Then he removed it with that edit summary. I think my comment was valid there, definitely not "offtopic". If he doesn't want it, fine.
If too many recent comments are a problem to you, you can remove mine, or put the whole thing on a subpage etc. Squash Racket (talk) 12:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

This discussion doesn't belong to someone's talk page, but to the article's talk page.--Svetovid (talk) 13:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Then you should check the talk page yourself, where Svetovid was talking about the very same things (blogs, reliable sources) complaining about the lack of my answer(!) that he thinks now belong on the article's talk page. What should I say? Squash Racket (talk) 14:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for messing up your talk page once again. I moved Katie's comment to the bottom, so the "mess" is in one block, easier to handle. I tried a show/hide template on my talk page for a cleanup here, but it didn't work out perfectly. Squash Racket (talk) 20:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Template

Oh, no real reason. Thought it would liven things up for newbies, confuse everyone, cause wiki-drama. ;-) Seriously, though, sorry about that – I must have got it into a different browser tab than the one I intended. I'm getting pretty tired and I think it's time to stop, now that I'm hacking away at the templates. If I don't do something other than WP:CP I'm going to go insane soon. Thanks very much for catching it and letting me know. - KrakatoaKatie 10:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Max Mosley

Hi. Could you take a look at the proposal I've made at Talk:Max Mosley?

It is a neutral, encyclopedic statement with an authoritative source (AP via the International Herald Tribune). Thanks Mark83 (talk) 20:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response to my talk page & the helpful comments at the article talk page. We've now got an authoritative section. I'll keep an eye on it, as I'm sure will others, to see that it stays encyclopedic. Mark83 (talk) 23:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Bratislava topics

The Central Europe history is very complicated. Bratislava was parts of Hungary 1000 years, but now it is Slovakia capital.(treaty of trianon) Slovakia's own history is very little.Slovaks wrote Bratislava's history on the wikipedia (Bratislava/history chapter, History of Bratislava, Bratislava Castle) and these articles are very one-sided. Because these topics the Slovak nationalist's guarded area, putting NPOV-templates out to them would cause a serious scandal. A good solution would be later if these articles would receive totally protected status, and neutral administrators (not Slavs) could rewrite this themes.Nmate (talk • contribs) —Preceding comment was added at 09:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe all this upheaval at wiki is not about Central Europe's complicated history, but rather about a user not familiar with how Wikipedia works. Despite all the warnings on his/her user talk page, User:Nmate keeps making childish jokes about living persons, saying nasty things about non-Hungarian nations, and attacking other editors. Here are some examples:

• He/she abused Wikipedia's article to claim that Slovakia's prime minister's "true confession" and "self-criticism looking back on the Fico cabinet's activities" is a 17th-century outlaw.[11] Wikipedia is not a place for political commentaries. Please also note that he/she called an IP a "clone" of an established user and a previous unproblematic version of an article "serious vandalism" in his/her edit summary.
• He/she makes inappropriate jokes about other editors, calling another user "he Czech lion which defending his Slovak siblings"[12], suggesting that two editors are followers of a neo-Nazi leader Marian Kotleba[13] (this was completely uncalled for and especially disturbing for me as my grand father was in a concentration camp), and calling other people's work "dubious Pan-Slavic propaganda".[14]
• He/she said: "There is a Hungarian joke that whole Slovakia's only history is possible to send in a short mobile phone's text messsage."[15] Maybe it was supposed to be funny, but it has offended many people here.
• After being warned agianst hate speech, he/she continued in the same tone: "the important historical events should be there and so Slovak historical event is not exist before the 20th century".[16]

Many people have tried to talk to him/her, but it did not work. All the deleted warnings (up to NPA4 if I remember well) may be found in the history of his/her user talk page. I feel a stronger action is needed to show him/her that Wikipedia has some rules that make our work more efficient and pleasant. Tankred (talk) 16:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

As for the first point, he cited a source for the most part. If you don't agree with it, you can modify it. You just removed it, although Prime Minister Fico really talked about Jánosik as a role model which is definitely relevant. Your edit may be criticised just as well.

All other cases happened before a Wikiquette Alerts discussion (26 March) for which he's already been warned, presenting these as new cases is a bit misleading.

Let's not forget how he received some of those warnings. He's a relatively new user, so asking him to read WP:CIV would be OK I think.

Regarding offensive edit summaries someone else has also a thing or two to learn despite being an experienced user. Squash Racket (talk) 17:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

RoK Stub

Issue is being addressed at Talk:Kosovo#Consensus_is_Reachable 02:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Your comment that there is a mess of arguments

There really isn't. If you read DBACHMANS topic where he says a split is the only way, and then you follow that convo, you will see that there isn't a "mess of arguments." There has been one argument through many sections. Not many. Can you revise your statement after reading the sections I have mentioned? As an administrator you saying there is a mess of arguments when there is only one, and it's almost resolved, does not help. Thanks. Beam (talk) 03:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Cell phone

She wasn't talking on a cell phone (no call signals from her mobile on that day). Beaten up and dizzy she couldn't remember if she spoke on the phone or on the street (see end of first paragraph at Police investigation), most newspapers initially got it wrong. Most probably she was giving directions to a Hungarian couple sitting in a car just before being attacked.
We've seen this case going on for years now, nobody expects you to know all the details in a few days. Hope this comment clarifies this.
The "factual accuracy dispute" tag is unjustified, I just didn't want to edit war over it. Squash Racket (talk) 05:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh no, they did it again and moved Kosova

Lord, have mercy upon us... it is just outrageous what is going on there! --Tubesship (talk) 08:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Hedvig Malina

If you look at Talk:Hedvig_Malina/Archive_1#Requested_move, there have been more people, not just one, arguing for the use of her official name instead of the one preferred by the Hungarian media. That is also my view, based on the statistics cited on the article's talk page. As you can see from the history of the page, I was not part of that lengthy edit war and I will be happy to change my opinion if more convincing evidence for the Hungarian name is provided. By the way, I would appreciate your opinion at User_talk:Ricky81682#Bratislava_topics. Tankred (talk) 15:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The Slovak name is used by the Slovak media, is that any way better? The Hungarian version is supported by an official letter from the US Congress. There is no more credible English language source using the Slovak name. Also because of the case being sensitive, I don't think the Slovak version would help future stability of the article. Squash Racket (talk) 17:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Your answer to User_talk:Ricky81682#Bratislava_topics would be welcome more than ever. Despite all the possible NPA warnings that an editor can get, User:Nmate resorted to personal attacks again. In an edit summary, he/she said " jeden: naničhodník; dva: nepotrebný; tri: Sweetovid". This Slovak sentence can be translated as "one: a rogue, two: unneeded, three: Sweetovid", clearly referring to another editor (User:Svetovid).[17] Given the record of personal attacks and hate speech by User:Nmate, I would expect Wikipedia's administrators to react at least as firmly as they did in the case of Svetovid's edit warring. I am sorry to ask you personally for help in this issue, but you seem to be around. Tankred (talk) 17:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

(sorry to jump in) No comment to the comment below me. Now I think it's high time for administrators to do something about this. Yes, I believe he/they try to throw red herrings to distract from his actions, and especially from the examples of hate speech. MarkBA ^{what's up?/my mess} 19:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ricky! Do not believe Tankréd's message. What I wrote does not mean it in Slovak.I commented Svetoid's writings simply:1, useless 2,trivia 3, Sweetovid.Is Sweetovid a serious personal attack? I had to respond that the Slovaks do not allow it that let me write into the Slovak topics. If i would write my opinion of Tankréd behaviour sincere I could get blocking for it really.Nmate (talk • contribs) —Preceding comment was added at 18:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Anyone can verify my translation of Nmate's words by checking an online dictionary. Moreover, Nmate has just attacked again.[18] Perhaps it is supposed to be funny, but I did not join Wikipedia 7,400 edits ago to laugh at jokes about myself. I could go to a comedy show instead. I joined this project to write articles. Tankred (talk) 20:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Nmate also called me a good-for-nothing fink in a recent edit.
But I probably shouldn't complain, because Ricky already blocked me for complaining.
This is getting funnier by the minute.--Svetovid (talk) 13:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Note: same edit mentioned above by Tankred in detail. I would also like to know if someone edited from IPs in an abusive way with a number of brutal edit summaries or not. Squash Racket (talk) 13:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

So many unanswered questions

See my talk page.--Svetovid (talk) 22:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Nmate's behavior he definitely didn't like that comment five hours after Svetovid's block partly for incivility expired. And even you said this IP was also a bit suspicious with interesting edit summaries in specific articles, I would say this one too had obviously edited Wikipedia before, maybe a Checkuser could clarify this. Squash Racket (talk) 07:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ricky!

The warning message what you sent to me was very unfair. MarkBA returned, from your short wikibreak that let him accuse me of a hated speech on your talk page. He called me a mob (rabble) in his farewell writing then. My answer was very moderate compared to this.Nmate (talk • contribs) —Preceding comment was added at 14:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Photo on Zane Morris Page

article says to add copyright info but links aren't active, where do I go to do that? Hyperbeard (talk) 22:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

thank you

I am so mad because I've been banned for no reason. Help me by pointing out what you think are insults. I want to change those. I will review it now and see if revisions can be done. Please help! Harry59c (talk) 07:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Please help. All I want is some normal people to offer a hand in stopping this mess. Is this what Wikipedia is, a myspace.com band of admins doing whatever they want and occasionally letting a few people edit for show? Say it isn't so! Please help. I am on the verge of giving up. I didn't know people were so cruel.165.21.155.115 (talk) 07:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Looks like I missed some fun. Thanks for the notice. · jersyko talk 13:15, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Concerning user-requested deletion tags

Where do I find such a tag template that will allow me to request that a page (one of my user subpages that became obsolete once I created a new subpage with the correct name) be deleted?
I checked all the relevant categories that I found here, but to no avail.
Can you direct me to the right place?

— TimAlderson (lōque) (adiuvam reī) (arcae-usūs) (MMXIX) —Preceding comment was added at 14:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Nmate again

Hi Ricky, I am sorry to reply so late, but I had to go to an unexpected business trip. I am a bit surprised by your message on my talk page. I am not misleading you. Although English is not my first language, I think my words (you can find them on your own user talk page) were clear: "All the deleted warnings (up to NPA4 if I remember well) may be found in the history of his/her user talk page." Of course you will not find warning templates on Nmate's talk page because he/she has deleted them. So, here is the list of warnings that Nmate has received:[19],[20],[21],[22],[23],[24],[25],[26],[27],[28],[29],[30],[31]. I guess so many warnings received from different editors reveal something about patterns of Nmate's edits. I am sorry for my bitter words, but I thought you would know better than to accuse me of providing misleading information. It would be perfectly sufficient to read your own talk page and then to look at the history page, to which my comment tried to point you. Tankred (talk) 16:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy should be quoted here because it is relevant to the above discussion. From WP:HAR, found at [32] "Placing numerous false or questionable 'warnings' on a user's talk page, restoring such comments after a user has removed them,... in their user space is a common form of harassment." Thank you for documenting this relentless harassment of user Nmate by providing these diffs, this is valuable evidence, particularly telling is the large amount of harassment coming from one particular user who was already suspected [33] of such actions, but this new evidence reveals the true extent of this. Hobartimus (talk) 16:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Nmate has been warned by four different users and blocked by another one. If he/she is being harassed, it must be a true international conspiracy. Let us be serious please. Tankred (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Tankred, watch out or you may be blocked for complaining without any explanation from Ricky.--Svetovid (talk) 18:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Kosova

Hi Ricky, if you have time, please do Wikipedia a huge benefit by having a look into Kosovas discussion page as there seems to be a "problematical" administrator. --Mustafa Mustamann (talk) 09:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Image

I am not fully sure that I understand how to do it. Stampede1961 (talk) 10:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the heads up. I have added a plethora of information to the posting.Angrymansr (talk) 00:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)