User talk:Natalie Erin

For some reason my campus network has been dropping out randomly this weekend. So if it seems like I suddenly disappear in the middle of a task, my apologies - it's not intentional. Hopefully this will be dealt with soon.

edit count | edit summary usage

What the Heck?

I edited something on the "7 may" page and you keep deleting it, why?? It is constructive and I don't see how it is "vandalism". So I plan to re-edit the page. Thank you for causing others more work and frustration.

Sorry

i haven't remover anthing of the footballers wives episodes page. And i created the page an just wasn't signed in at the time. i accidently lost the series 4 episode summarys when i was writing them. I put them back up straight away.

deleting things...

thanks for clearing the stuff about deletion up. I'm new to deletion... ens 02:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ens (talk • contribs) 01:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

     ok and where am i supposed to reply to things you say to me? here? ens 02:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

          Thanks for the insight. I agree with you. It's much easier to do it back and forth. ens 14:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

how do I change the title of an article? I want to change St. Peter High School (Ottawa) to St. Peter Catholic High School

never mind - sorry i got it now. ens 20:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Dr. Qwert

I was not aware that the consensus had changed. I was also under the impression that removing recent warnings from one's talk page was also considered vandalism. I'm sorry if I had erred. Pumeleon^T 02:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Re [1]

I tagged Byron Long for speedy deletion since it appeared to be entirely unreferenced, which, given the controversial nature of the subject matter, would constitute a serious WP:BLP violation. WP:BLP states that

Administrators encountering biographies that are unsourced and controversial in tone, where there is no NPOV version to revert to, should delete the article without discussion (see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion criterion G10 for more details).

Looking through the page history, however, it appears that there actually was a reference for the article, which I have restored. John254 02:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

CSD G10 does use the term "negative in tone", which is a somewhat unfortunate choice of words. The more fundamental policy here appears to be Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, which states that "biographies that are unsourced and controversial in tone" should be speedily deleted. The underlying issue is not whether we believe that a description of a living person as a "porn actor" is actually negative. Rather, for WP:BLP purposes, the issue is whether, if an article incorrectly described someone as a "porn actor", such a description would be regarded as defamatory for the purpose of Wikipedia:Libel -- that is, whether such an incorrect description, if widely believed, might be likely to have a significantly adverse effect on the employment prospects or general reputation of the subject of the article. I would contend that describing someone as a "porn actor" is sufficiently "controversial in tone" to invoke WP:BLP concerns for the speedy removal and/or deletion of any unreferenced claims of this nature. John254 02:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of rain check

Why has this valid article disappeared? Please undelete it, and if you feel it is not up to Wikipedia standards, instead nominate it under WP:AfD, to give others a chance to comment on it and/or improve it. Thanks.  –radiojon 02:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

• I understand that it has been transwikied, however it was enough to be its own Wikipedia article, and can be expanded from a stub to a better article by adding information about how rainchecks are handled and processed by stores. (For example, some simply hand the user a piece of paper or carbon copy, others take the customer's information, enter it into a computer, and print a raincheck with a barcode, later notifying the customer automatically by phone/email/mail. Also, other offers like rebates may no longer be valid when the raincheck is redeemed.)  –radiojon 03:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thkxs for the welcome

I'm finally making an effort to participate around here. Thanks for the welcome! Blckdmnd99 03:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Jen Banbury

Thanks for spotting that this was not a proper speedy delete about the same time i first noticed it. I have rewritten and expanded the article significantly, although it could doubtless use further work. DES ^(talk) 03:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

All of my info and sources came out of the first two pages of a google search on her name -- not really tricky research. I agree, lots of people over use A7 and G1, and db-context. That's why I undeleted this and expanded it a bit. The original was not well written, but the key facts were there. DES ^(talk) 03:45, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but in this case note that it wasn't just mis-tagged. An admin actually deleted the page, while I was working on my first edit. I undeleted. The admin says that he "still stands by" his decision to delete the version as it was when tagged. DES ^(talk) 04:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I need a bit of help

Could you go ahead and delete Sky2k.com? I think an IP sock of the author is removing the CSD tag. It's obvious spam so I have no qualms about replacing that tag. Pumeleon^T 03:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. :3 Pumeleon^T 03:43, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Joss Fritz

Fair comment - it asserts notability, I'll ensure I check this in future before doing a db-nn. I've tagged it for cleanup+wikify for now, as it's rather lacking, the way it stands. Regards, --Oscarthecat 17:07, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion comment

I, unfortunately, do not know any other tags beside the db-bio to mark a page for possible deletion. I understand that there is an "articles for deletion" list, as I have discussed pages there myself; however, I do not know the tag to mark a page as such, nor do I know the tag for 'proposed deletion.' Useight 17:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to say thanks for the information that I can now use to better help keep Wikipedia free of frivolous articles. I just stick to my personal motto: "I got everyone's back."

Sorry about that. I'm pretty new around here and am currently reading all the many rules on the "Administrators' Reading List." Once I learn all these little 'house-keeping' rules, I hope to apply to be an admin myself. Useight 17:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

hello and wondering how to ...

I wanted to put an entry in like spectrum strategy consultants, but when i do i get a deletion thingee. suggestions?

btw Dublin Ireland is a lot different from Minneapolis, Minnesota. Galway Ireland would be a better fit.

looking for help in advance, —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Angus.goldfinch (talk • contribs) 19:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

comment on location for vacation - cultural fit - just trying to help (worked in MSP for many years in the Hi Tech business in the 90s and Ireland in 00s)

Down to brass tacks. There is an item for Spectrum Strategy which I based an entry on. So why is my entry deleted and the one for Spectrum Strategy not? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Angus.goldfinch (talk • contribs) 19:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

I am using the same as spectrum strategy consultants along the lines of what you have suggested, i.e. no daylight. Both entries should be handled the same either accepted or spam deleted. right? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Angus.goldfinch (talk • contribs) 19:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

mmm if you do a search on intercai mondiale you well see a number of proven reputable sources. OFCOM a la FCC and other public sector entries as well as those on the international stage and not just within the narrow geography of the US.

Now will you please provide some consistency either delete both or accept both since they both deliver to the global 2000 companies and contribute to the regulation of telecoms in the world.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Angus.goldfinch (talk • contribs)

i am looking for guidance and consistency here, i.e. understanding. If I am following along the lines of other items, such as spectrum consulting, why are they not be handled the same way? why am I being differently when the standard has been already set that I am following. Both items intercai mondiale and spectrum consulting should be handled the same way yes?

if one is deleted the other should be deleted if the style, delivery, etc. are the same. 21:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)21:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Proliphix

Why did you delete the article for Proliphix earlier today? I am very new to Wikipedia and I am trying to understand how things work. It seemed to me to be a valid entry for a topic that was not yet included in Wikipedia. Please help me understand why it was deleted. Thanks, Ryan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ryan.hoger (talk • contribs) 01:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

--Ryan Hoger 01:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

what happened?

what was going on with the JW page? first there was info but then it dissapeared. now its back. was someone vandalizing it?Mstare88 17:20, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

are you allowed to say who it was? if so who was it? the one time that i looked it said coolman76. due to the vandalism have they been blocked? if they were will they ever be unblocked? i am asking because if the person is who i think it is then it is one of my friends who is a big anti-JWMstare88 17:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

The Vandal.

71.79.51.157 was quite a persistent vandal. Ignored all my warnings just to vandalize your user page, and they got a month-long block as a reward for their brilliant and construtive editing to your user page. Total count: 69. :) Acalamari 23:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

It was someone you blocked exactly one week ago. :) Acalamari 23:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• Whoops, I posted that at the same time you posted that other message. Sorry. :) Acalamari 23:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that the above vandal was the same guy that vandalized your page today using the IP 129.137.211.186 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). This troll has vandalized my userpage about 40 times since February using the above address and addresses that start with 129... which are registered to the University of Cincinnati. I believe the 71... address to be his home and now that it is blocked for a month, you can expect vandalism from a number of different 129... addresses. The problem is that he vandalizes once from a computer at his school and then moves to a different computer. I'm glad that he appears to have lost interest in me, but I regret that he has transferred it to you. Cynrin 21:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Wetherby Speedy delete

Hello Natalie. I flagged the two earlier edit pages for wp:speedy as they specifically name the local community police officer (PC Rowden) in a defamatory way. I believe that where this type of vandalism happens you are able to either delete or hide earlier edits. The edits in question are: Revision as of 13:25, 29 March 2007 (the orig vandalism) and Revision as of 20:33, 3 April 2007 (where I tried to tag the above for delete but just succeeded in making it the top level - so I reverted it quickly.) HTH. Thanks RichardEll 08:39, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Leadership & Public Service Center

---Hi, I'm not sure how this works yet either.... I noticed that you are responsible for deleting a wiki that I created on the Edward E. Carlson Leadership & Public Service Center at the University of Washington. This was the first wiki that I have ever tried to create and I do not understand why it has been deleted or how to communicate regarding any changes that would need to take place in order for the page to be accepted. Please contact me at mattwojo at u.washington dot edu or via my user talk page. Thank-You! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattwojo (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your quick reply Natalie! Your feedback is very helpful. This is particularly good advice and I appreciate your making the change:

I would recommend not typing your email address on Wikipedia without obscuring it - there are various email address harvesting spiders on the web, and it can make you a target for spam. If you want to type an email, you can obscure it by writing out the @ and . signs, like this: someaddress at someserviceprovider dot com, instead of someaddress@someserviceprovider.com.

I do have further questions about this comment:

the article Carlson leadership and public service center was deleted because it was copied from a website that asserted a copyright license incompatible with the GFDL, the license Wikipedia is copyrighted under. More information about copyright law and how it affects Wikipedia can be found at Wikipedia:Copyrights.

The text copied from the Carlson Center website is text that I wrote and that the Center would gladly grant me permission to use. I can pursue this, but I also am wondering if I simply re-wrote this information differently, would the problem with the page be solved?

Thank-you again for your time & valuable information!!!

Mattwojo 18:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)Mattwojo

The foul-mouthed judge

He did indeed, and not a problem at all for the reversion. He hit my talk page earlier.--Xnuala (talk) 02:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Would you consider removing the autoblock on User:Mstare88?

User:Yamla declined to remove the autoblock citing the lack of productive edits in Mstare88's contributions log. Yamla was right. There weren't any worthwhile contributions at the time.

Since then, however, Mstare88 has created an article on John Madden NFL '93 which was quickly redirected to John Madden Football '93. Well, OK, he should learn to look at what articles exist before creating a new one but that's just part of learning the ropes here at Wikipedia.

This edit should show that he is willing to discuss edits with other editors and become part of our community. (At last!)

So, please give him another chance and remove the autoblock.

Thanks.

--Richard 05:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

♠TomasBat (@)(Contribs)(Sign!) 14:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Living and working ....

... in Dublin, Ireland??? Woohoo!! That's where I'm originally from :) It's an awesome place - you'll totally love it! - Alison^☺ 15:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC) (why yes, I am biased!)

Ip rolling to harass editors

It appears that open proxies are being used on User talk:Jimbo Wales to make personal attacks and cause disruption. What do we do? Retiono Virginian 18:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

And User talk:Wiki alf and User talk:Doc glasgow before they got protected. – Riana ^ऋ 18:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

God, no! :) You can drop a note at ANI, plenty of people know how to do something about it over there. – Riana ^ऋ 18:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I have set up a basic report at the admins noticeboard. (The basic one, not incidents) and if there are any more Ips and talk pages involved could you list them there. Retiono Virginian 18:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I blocked a few, I'll list them there. – Riana ^ऋ 18:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Another Ip User:81.79.160.76 has appeared and began attacks on User:Wiki alf's talk page. I will list this on the admin board. Retiono Virginian 20:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, could you do me a little favour and sign here? Retiono Virginian 16:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Count.

Damn! Missed that count! :) Busy editing stuff to do with Christina Aguilera and didn't notice! :) Acalamari 18:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

beat me to the block

You beat me to the wiki alf wanker vandal block! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Our little "accident", and a rule proposal to avoid it.

I was sure I can count on you to relieve the "mis-block" I got for creating the Jimbo-doppelganger "Djimbo WhaIes". However, this revealed a little "bug" in the block system: there should be a type of username block that doesn't autoblock IPs for cases when the block is due to a username problem. (It makes no sense to have the message "It's encouraged that you create a new account with a proper name", and at the same time have a block preventing the use or creation of a new account... We surely need a fix for this.) What do you think about it? --NetRolller 3D 21:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

IP vandal

I don't think anyone has contact his ISP. Feel free to go ahead. IrishGuy ^talk 22:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

You're good.

I was just posting a warning to the creator of the Chandeka page, and when I finished and saved it, the page was deleted. You found and deleted a page within minutes. Nice job. Mattbash 01:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Username Change

Thanks for the heads-up Natalie, will change nickname post-haste. Scarybot 02:01, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

...

Moved the request to the username change page! Scarybot 02:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Messaage

I posted the same question near the warning I gave to jesuschristlovesomelets. How do you revert to previous versions of an article? I've come across a lot of vandalism, but couldn't change it back. Mattbash 02:05, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Please read Natalie

i, Tonye104292, edited my user page and removed the part about the weed and the biggest store in the world bc i didnt add that. i logged in to my account, tonye104292, and made the proper revisions.

Block proposal

You may want to block user: John fogerty man. This user has received many warnings already, and I just reverted what he did to Lisa Lampanelli, whoever she is. Look at the edit. I'm sure you'd agree that calling someone a "cunt" is uncalled for and inappropriate, no matter the situation. Mattbash 02:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reverting the edits made by an anonymous IP to my user page! Bobo. 03:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

The Revert.

Thank you for the revert. I have to assume that user is a sockpuppet of "Acalamari has a WikiCrush on Alison". Heh, I see they put "hugs and kisses" and the end of every message I've left here. Acalamari 16:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

If they're the vandal I think they are, I don't think they'll be stopping anytime soon. If they're not...well, we'll see what happens. The only thing I find annoying about this vandal is that I have to update my vandal count, and I try to edit my user page as little as possible. If this keeps up, maybe I'll just update the count every two or three cases. Acalamari 17:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Localisation?

Hi there,

I've been watching the recent changes list for a couple of days, and I've noticed a few changes in localisation between the US 'z' and the British 's' ... 'globalization' vs 'globalisation', for example. Is there any consensus on which should be used?

Thanks! MackSalmon 17:00, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Refer to WP:ENGVAR --Richard 17:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

GP

GP is an acronym for gay porn. Why remove it? 24.77.26.214 18:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

http://www.rohitab.com/discuss/lofiversion/index.php/t23183.html and http://www.blogmarks.net/marks/tag/gp are two examples of someone utilising GP as an acronym for 'gay porn.' 24.77.26.214 18:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not an article on the acronym, it's merely a mention of it in article which lists possible uses of the acronym 'GP.' Secondly, in order to prove that GP can mean gay porn, wouldn't I only need to show that people do use that acronym? As far as I know, there is no accredited source which lists legitimate acronyms. 24.77.26.214 18:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Are each of those uses listed on the GP article listed in a dictionary? I think it would be rather hard to provide concrete sources for each of the uses listed in the GP article. As to the issue of notability, Wikipedia is not paper. Why do people care that 'Worldwide green parties' can be referred to as 'GP'? The point of that article is simply to list possible uses of two letters, and gay porn is one of them. 24.77.26.214 18:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

It also happens that Wikipedia:Ignore_all_rules is also an official policy of Wikipedia. I'm getting a sense here that you find 'gay porn' morally offensive, as indicated by your 'reader's patience' comment. 24.77.26.214 19:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Please leave the San Francisco nicknames alone

I am from San Francisco therefore I know the most commonly used nicknames, however when I add the nicknames used daily they keep being erased which is very irritating. If Wikipedia is an encyclopedia should it not use the correct information so that when others read it they know more about it? Again I have lived here my whole life so I know the names used, whether I like them or not they are the nicknames used; these are "Frisco", "The Sco", "Sucka Free City", "The City", "City By The Bay". However, "Fog City" is not a commonly used term for San Francisco; in fact I have not heard that ever before. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tsparxxx (talk • contribs) 19:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

I have not reverted any additions made by this username although I did revert an edit by the IP address 72.65.228.141. If this is you then I'm afraid I will not leave the page alone, as edits like this one are blatantly unacceptable. If this IP is not you, please don't spam me about issues I'm not involved in. Thank you. Natalie 20:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Block

I am not sure but I think your block of User:Nishkib64 should have autoblock disabled to allow the user to create a new account (the user has requested an unblock to allow for a new account to be created although you would only have to disable autoblock) Thanks. Donato (talk) 21:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, this seems like blatant imitation and therefore perhaps the user should not be allowed to create a new account as they may well continue to attempt to do this. Donato (talk) 21:28, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Need advice.

Hey Natalie. On the Criticism of Islam talk page, there is a user who is upset about the people listed as critics of Islam. He argues that they are not critics, but Anti-Muslim bigots. While I agree that Pat Robertson isn't really what I'd call a legitimate critic, he also argues against the inclusion of Bat Ye'or, Robert Spencer, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali. I'm surprised he made no mention of Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina. I don't want to make a judgment, but the user seems to be rather easily angered. I'll present the discussion for convenience here:

Compare this article with Religious antisemitism and Criticism of Judaism. According to the standards laid out in the first article, so-called "critics" like Pat Robertson, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Bat Ye'or are not "critics" but anti-Muslim bigots. It's known as "calling a spade a spade". My suggestion is to rename this article to Anti-Islamic sentiments or move the more libellous and hateful garbage from the likes of Robertson (who calls Muslims "devils" and believes all Muslims will burn in hell) and Bat Ye'or to that article title. We must not tolerate this hatred here. See WP:NPOV. Wikipedia of all places should be able to differentiate between what is legitimate criticism and what is obviously hateful and xenophobic rhetoric ("Eurabia" being a perfect example). That the hatred and prejudice towards Islam and Muslims is widely tolerated and accepted is proven with this article, which rather than about "criticism" is about hatred of Islam. Khorshid 02:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinion. It seems that you're easily offended. Please don't get so riled up.--C.Logan 04:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

See Antisemitism - if I was a Jew, would you be saying that??? Please keep your patronising attitude out of this discussion, otherwise you may be blocked for incivility. We do not tolerate bigotry here - I understand many people hate Muslims. Wikipedia does not tolerate such hatred. Khorshid 11:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I was uncivil? It seems that you jump to conclusions about other people's motives. I was simply trying to suggest that you calm the flame a bit, but I can see that you'll have none of that. Sorry if you misunderstood me.--C.Logan 20:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I could easily do without including Robertson, but Bat Ye'or is critic who comes from a scholarly POV. - Merzbow 05:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately Bat Ye'or promotes anti-Islamic and anti-Arab conspiracy theories. If you're telling me that people like Bat Ye'or are legitimate critics of Islam, then Holocaust denialists and anti-Semites like David Duke and Robert Faurrison are legitimate critics of Judaism. Like I said, double standards. Muslims are the devils, after all, right? According to our Christian friends, we're all going to hell, so who gives a crap, right? 89. You know what?! Damn right I'm easily offended. Easy to talk like that when you're not the one being shoved around and stereotyped as a terrorist. I'm sick of that kind of attitude. If you guys want to promote conspiracy theorists and bigots as "critics" of Islam, then Wikipedia has lost its credibility, and considering Essjay controversy, its not surprising. But I urge Muslim editors not to give into this bullying. There is a distinct difference between bigotry and criticism, and so far, this article is of the latter variety. So much for "Christian tolerance". Ha, what a joke. Khorshid 11:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

The guy up there, a Christian, tells me "I'm easily offended"

Does the fact that I'm a Christian affects my assessment? Whether I'm a Christian, an atheist, a Bahai, or a Scientologist, I would still tell you that you need to keep a cool head. Anger isn't going to help you in getting your point across. And please don't stereotype Christians- it makes you guilty of taking the first steps into practicing the very thing that you're condemning.--C.Logan 20:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, I haven't yet offered any real response. I could argue that people like Richard Dawkins and Ahmed Deedat are not valid critics of Christianity (because they have a misunderstanding of it, or they let their bias show clearly in their arguments), but they are generally agreed to be valid critics. It is my opinion that the user has a victim complex which is getting in the way of having a civil discussion- and yet he threatens have me banned for being uncivil in my first comment. (Please excuse the last sentence, but it's something I felt was worth expressing).

I'm coming to you because I am unfamiliar with many of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and cannot offer much more than an opinion in response. I was hoping that you could give some advice as to whether or not the user has a valid point, or whether he is just fuming on the talk page with no good reason. He has placed a 'totallydisputed' tag and has commanded that it not be removed (as it was previously removed by another user). Any help with this matter would be appreciated.--C.Logan 21:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

category deletion or merge

Hi - a category was recently created called "Category:Democratic Party" which is a dab problem and already covered by "Category:Democratic Party (United States)". Only a handful of politicians are in it - the description also is incorrect (unless Andrew Johnson is a candidate for something...) I left a note on the creator's talk page User:TheJediCouncil about it. I think this was well-meaning, but it needs to be merged and removed, and I didn't know how to accomplish that, so thought I'd pass it along to a friendly admin! Thanks Tvoz |talk 16:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - that was fast! Tvoz |talk 17:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandal and sockpuppet

Natalie, can you look into something for me? User:Saabusa has added satirical speculation to the E-2 Hawkeye three times since April 6. After the 3rd time (today), I placed vandalism warning on his talk page (at the same time). These are the only edits this user has made. Later today, User:70.160.29.117 added the same exact material again. THe material is not in anyway constructive, is mostly fictional, and is tring to be funny or make political points. Because of that, I'm not treating this as a content dispute, but as vandalism. Admin User:Chrislk02 usually handles these sorts of thing for me, but he is on an extended weekend break, and so is unavailable. As I usually tell Chris, do what you think is best in this situation. If there is anything you want me to do further in this case, just let me know. Thanks in advance for whatever you are able to do. - BillCJ 03:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Block request

Hi Natalie, just reverted some vandalism to your page from Agesrange. Maybe a temporary block on this user or at the very least an admin's warning? --Speed Air Man 15:39, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Block Duration?

How long is the user blocked for? I just want to make sure to gird my loins before it expires, in anticipation of all the Backlash-y. Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 17:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The user was trying to sock-puppet? How did you detect that so quickly? (kinda in awe) -Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 19:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

APNIC/Cheri DiNovo vandal

I've got a solution: block the IPs for a short period (say 48 hours), anon. only, account creation allowed, that way it may stop him when he realises he cannot edit as an IP address.

It may persuade him to create an account, which would certainly make tracking his edits a lot easier, as by default, an IP address is not an account.

Hope I've helped you with this. I've added the articles you mentioned, to my watchlist, by the way. --SunStar Net ^talk 18:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Takfiri‎

Please take a look at this article. Users such as User:Sun shinez forever, User:No problem 1254, User:Heats of heaven, and possibly many others, were created as a revertign machine for this article. They are probably sockpuppets of a radical user with an obious agenda. As User:Zora said: The article is being used to attack religious groups with which the editor does not agree. --AraLink 08:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Dreamz rosez, is anothr sockpuppet of the same user. Not to mention his many random IPs. --AraLink 19:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Comment re. Entology

Ms. Erin,

As I am a resource advocate and "champion" of the U.S. Constitution, I was duly offended that you arbitrarily deleted my entry 'Entology.' My apologies for my initial reaction, and I respectfully request a DETAILED explanation for your action. As I believe that not only did you delete my entry, you also deleted my account. Therefore, please forward your explanation to georgejohnsonhill@tongueslanginbest.com, I will be waiting... And please, don't insult me by saying it was an April fool's hoax. Respectfully, Entologist George Johnson-Hill, www.tongueslanginbest.com/akili — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.154.184.196 (talk • contribs)

• Note that this editor has previously made a legal threat on this page and has received a final warning for WP:NLT - Alison^☺ 17:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Sir, the Entology page was marked {{db-context}} by another editor and this administrator duly deleted it under the WP:CSD#G1 ruling. Your userpage (not your account) had a redirect to the article concerned and this was deleted by another administrator under WP:CSD#R1 as the article was now non-existent. You may contest these deletions if you wish (see WP:DRV) however, it is my opinion that these administrators were acting well within policy when the pages were deleted - Alison^☺ 17:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Response to "Yer email".

Thank you for your response, and there's no need to apologize for being late to respond. Sometimes it takes me a few days to get back to someone. Natalie Erin, would you mind blocking Time stands still as I gaze in her waters? They left a message on my talk page called "Vandalism counter", and I am 100% sure that the user is our favorite vandal. Acalamari 18:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Ha ha, thanks. :) Acalamari 18:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what (blanking warning 2) means.

What is my warning for? I have not even submitted my entry on Knoxville rollergirls Team K-CITY ROLLERS... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nijoli (talk • contribs) 23:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC).

10,000 Edits For You.

I meant to tell you this yesterday: you have crossed the 10,000 edits mark. Congratulations. :) Acalamari 16:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Please Help

Dear Natalie, this group of belogers from IranChamber again started to revert and delete all of the referenced edits from Reza Shah page. They have turned the article as a copy of their IranChamber pages on Reza shah. The Relationship of Nazi Germany and Reza shah is reported in Wikipedia Persian Jews page and the citation is from

• Sanasarian, Eliz (2000). Religious Minorities in Iran. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-77073-4.

and please see also:

• http://www.jewishreview.org/Archives/Article.php?Article=2006-01-01-1926

They have again given him the title of "Great", and have eliminated all references that this title was by the force of a military junta was imposed by his son (please see the discussion on Great on talk pages). All the attempt in mediation by Scott Willson to provide a NPOV voice is now nullified

Best regards Artaxerex 22:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Natalie, please look at the Reza Shah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)'s history. This (proven) multiple sock puppet master has no shame to completely rewrite the article to suit his POV. Furthermore the accusations here are outrageous when all he was asked to do was to in fact quote what he is referring to by this source that he wants to use. He repeatedly calls every other editor of that article a "gang" [2] because they simply want it to be WP:NPOV, not just HIS point of view! --Rayis 22:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

sockpuppets?

hi, is there any way to tell if User:Theseshoesrule, User:H0CK3YRU13S and the IP 132.205.154.202 are all the same person? I get the impression that they are the same from their edits on my talk page and this edit by the anon IP to the Hockey article. Hope you look into it. Anyway its no big deal I guess. I was just curious. Thanks. :) TwoOars ^{(T | C)} 04:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For the lightning-quick block. Best, Fvasconcellos 22:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

thanks for reverting vandalism

Hello Natalie, thanks for reverting vandalism to my talk page. I don't know what triggered it, because I rarely do any RC patrol, and I've never heard of this user before. Thanks again! --Kyoko 23:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Shac1 sockpuppet

I'm not sure that ShacOne is a sockpuppet of Shac1. Their edits seem to be very different. There certainly is a connection between the accounts but I'm not sure that it's sockpuppetry. I could be wrong, though, and I certainly am not going to lose any sleep over this after the trouble Shac1 has caused for me today. I've filed an RFCU so maybe we'll get to the bottom of it eventually.

In any case, thanks for your help and your work here! --ElKevbo 03:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree with User:ElKevbo, if this is a sockpuppet, it is a very odd one. If you look at the history of Capella University, ypu will find that ShacOne deleted material that Shac1 had been violating the 3RR to keep in the article, specifically this edit by ShacOne, as compared with this edit or this edit by Shac1.

However, I do think that User:Arla364 may very well be a sock of Shac1: all of Arla364's edits were to defend Shac1, and this "new user"s first edits were to the 3RR reporting board and the Admins notice board. See here. This may be worth looking into further. DES ^(talk) 13:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

This is just getting weird. It seemed odd to me that someone with a similar username would show up after Shac1 was blocked and continue the edit war, or in this case change to a different edit war (apparently I misread the diff). As I see it, there are several possibilities, one of which is that Shac1 and ShacOne are sockpuppets, but more in the good hand, bad hand tradition. The other possibility is that one is trying to make the other look bad, in which case ShacOne should probably be blocked anyway as an imitator. Shac1 hasn't contested the lengthening of his/her block yet, though, which is also interesting, although it's possible he/she hasn't been back online since. I have watchlisted Capella University article and no other new editors have appeared, but I guess I'll keep looking. Natalie 13:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

It is weird, and i don't think this is just a coincidince. I think (but can't prove) that ShacOne is a sock of one of the editors that Shac1 had been edit-warring with, with the dual purpose of getting Shacc1 blocked longer, and continuing the edit war on that article. (see Joe job.) I tend to suspect the "panioman" editor, but that is not at all clear cut. I also think that User:Arla364 is a sock of Shac1, as that editor has done nothing but protest Shac1's bblock. Note however that Arla364 has not continued the edit war itself. I do think that Shac1, although out-of-line here, was attempting to edit constructively. He seemed to think he was defendign the article from PoV-pushers, and he may well have been at least partly correct, but violating the 3RR is no way to do that. DES ^(talk) 13:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, it appears that Shac1 has indeed protested his lengthened block, and asked again to be unblocked. DES ^(talk) 13:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Think we should add Pizzaman0000 to the existing RFCU? --ElKevbo 14:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

So, you think that Shac1 and Arla364 are the same person, and ShacOne and Pizzaman0000 are the same person? Natalie 14:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

The first pair, yes. The second pair, quite possibly but I'm less sure. DES ^(talk) 18:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

As to the RFCU, I don't think the sockpuppetign here is at the level that a checkuser request will be accepted, and thre are other possible puppeteeers for ShacOne. Pizzaman0000 is merely a plausible suspect, IMO. DES ^(talk) 18:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

The RFCU has been completed and your instincts were right: Shac1 and Arla364 are the same user and ShacOne and Pizzaman0000 are the same user. I'm not sure where this leaves right now but at least a little bit of light has been shed on this situation. --ElKevbo 04:10, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Natalie it is clear that your ability to administer in a "negative point of view" should be questioned when you post the following comment in Shac1's talk page "Why I would do that while somehow part of a ploy to silence criticism about a degree mill is beyond me. Natalie 14:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)" You clearly have a previously perceived perception concerning Capella University that should be a cause of concern. You accuse Capella of being a degree mill when all governing bodies of the United States Deprartment of Educatio, your home state of Minnesota, and various other states disagree. I am making a formal request that you remove yourself from administrating Capella University and do so immediately.

Capella is like any University. There are those who like it, those who could care less, and a few who hate it.

If you were to visit the website www.capellauniversity.org you will see that posts on that website are similiar to those that Shac1 posted and were edited by ElKevbo. Words such as kickback, charges, and others are used to describe news stories when in fact no such quotes actually exist in any sited materials.

Is there a way to have a solid, progressive discussion concerning this article and once and for all get it resolved?Fizzleoneseven 17:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Natalie, no accusations only questions. Maybe you could give me some more insight. What constitiutes someone not have a NPOV?Fizzleoneseven 17:42, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

First, I am intrigued that as a brand new editor your first and only edits are here and concerning the Capella University article. At least two editors involved with that article have recently been discovered to employ sockpuppets and been blocked so I am sure you understand my suspicion. Second, I think you're misunderstanding Natalie's comment. She was using Shac1's words and viewpoint to illustrate a point and not (necessarily) endorsing that viewpoint. Finally, to describe Capella in light of recent and continuing events as "like any University" seems a bit misleading and disingenuous. --ElKevbo 17:50, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Recent Changes Patroller

When I revert vandalism others are usually finished reverting when I'm doing it. Is there a way from prevting that from happening? I am also not so sure what to put in the summary when I revert vandalism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 55555five55555 (talk • contribs) 21:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC).

I haven't vandalized anything

You simply can't cite to a book review as if it is a peer-reviewed scholarly work. I was misled by the entry. And the link doesn't work, so one can't check to see that the empirical assertions made are made by an author without any evidence whatsoever.

This has nothing to do with my personal opinions or my book recommendations. The point is a book review is not scholarly criticism, and the entry is misleading. You can't pawn off a book review that has mispellings in it and conclusions without citations or evidence as peer reviewed scholarly criticism. That's just false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.117.238.71 (talk • contribs)

Kitten

Tbh, I think the fact that the article has zero references is a bigger problem. If that was taken car eof, the notability issues would go too. So a sources tag would probably more appropriate - a notability one, I tend to find, only pisses off whoever wrote it. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 02:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Or their Wikipedia article. I swear our coverage of porn stars must outweigh the entire contents of Britannica at times...

Have fun in Ireland, it's a most beautiful, lovely, and friendly place on Earth and I'm sure you will be very happy there. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 02:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Be careful when reverting

I know you were just rving, but as a result (my italics):, Freemasonry "uses the metaphors of operative stonemasons' tools and implements, against the allegorical penis of the building of King Solomon's Temple." I find a good rule of thumb is to not revert to IP edits, unless you have read the article carefully or compared the diffs. MSJapan 04:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Torrisholme vandals

Hi there, you vandalism by one of the series of vandals of Torrisholme yesterday [3]. I have all the vandals listed at User:Flyguy649/Vandal_Tracker#Torrisholme. I was wondering if I can go and tag them with {{sockpuppet}}, with Graham Heavy (talk · contribs) as the puppetmaster. It may be easier to do AIV reports with a referral to a sockseries. Regards, Flyguy649^talk_contribs 17:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. I haven't labeled any of the 81.xx or 86.xx IPs, but their only edits seem to be on Torrisholme. Should I label them? Also, some of the accounts (apparently throwaways) aren't blocked. Can you do that for me? They are:

1. Graham Heavy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) designated puppetmaster
2. Adamcandle (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
3. Crabcruel (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Thanks, Flyguy649^talk_contribs 18:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for all your help! Flyguy649^talk_contribs 19:07, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I've created the subpage

It's located at User:Squirepants101/Danny Daniel. Squirepants101 20:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)